ArticleCancers2020
Modelling Curved Contact Flexible Microstrip Applicators for Patient-Specific Superficial Hyperthermia Treatment Planning.
Article in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hyperthermia-Based Anti-Cancer Treatments.Cancers · 2021Article
- Article
- Heating technology for malignant tumors: a review.International journal of hyperthermia : the official journal of European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology, North American Hyperthermia Group · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper describes a method to reconstruct bendable superficial hyperthermia applicators for routine clinical patient-specific treatment planning. The reconstruction uses a CT scan with a flexible silicone dummy applicator positioned on the patient. The curvature was approximated by two second-degree polynomial functions. A realistic treatment series was mimicked using a standard Alderson radiation therapy phantom and a treatment planning model was reconstructed from a CT scan. The variation among treatment curvatures was compared to the modelled curvature. The mathematical approximation of the applicator curvature was validated for this phantom experiment, as well as for clinical treatments. The average maximum variation among the successive mimicked sessions was 3.67 ± 0.69 mm (range 2.98-4.60mm). The maximum deviation between the treatment curvature and the modelled curvature was 4.35 mm. Comparing the treatment and approximated curvature yielded a maximum deviation between 2.98 mm and 4.12 mm. For clinical treatments the maximum deviation of the treatment and approximated curvature varied between 0.48 mm and 1.98 mm. These results allow adequate reconstruction of bendable hyperthermia applicators for treatment planning, which can further improve treatment quality, for example by optimizing the water bolus temperature for patient-specific tumor depths. Predictive parameters for hyperthermia treatment outcome can easily be evaluated and compared for various input parameters.
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.