ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2019
Is High Definition MLC Dosimetrically Superior to Standard Definition MLC for SIB-SBRT for Carcinoma Prostate.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study was conducted to quantitatively evaluate the dosimetric effects of high definition (2.5 mm) and standard definition (5.0 mm) MLC on the quality of SBRT plans using SIB-IMRT and SIB-VMAT technique for carcinoma prostate and also to evaluate the dosimetric advantage of one technique over the other. MATERIALS AND
methodsSeventeen annonymized planning CT data sets were used to generate plans for both VMAT and IMRT techniques using 2.5 mm and 5.0 mm MLC.The prescription to the nodule was 45Gy in 5 fractions and to the prostate was 35Gy in 5 fractions.CI, GI, D2%, D98%, D50% and V95% for target; D2%, Dmean, V80%, V20% for OAR's; V5% of the irradiated volume, and delivered MU's were analyzed.An independent t-test was used to compare the plans. Patient specific QA for all plans were also performed and analyzed.
resultsMinor difference in dosimetric indices was observed between 2.5mm and 5mm MLC VMAT plans, except D2% (PTV35) and D98% (GTV45) were better in 2.5mm MLC plans (p.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.