ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2020
Dosimetric comparison between RapidArc and HyperArc techniques in salvage stereotactic body radiation therapy for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dosimetric impact of knowledge-based automated planning using HyperArc for angiosarcoma of the scalp.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of dosimetric impact and plan robustness of MLC motion and setup errors in SRS for multiple brain metastases.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Article
- Total brain dose estimation in single-isocenter-multiple-targets (SIMT) radiosurgery via a novel deep neural network with spherical convolutions.Medical physics · 2025Article
- HyperArc radiotherapy for unresectable benign orbital tumours-cohort study and dosimetric comparison study.BJR open · 2025Article
- Impact of monitor unit optimization in volumetric modulated arc therapy planning for nasopharyngeal carcinoma.PloS one · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Efficacy of Machine Performance Checks as an Alternative to Winston-Lutz Quality Assurance Testing in the TrueBeam Linear Accelerator with HyperArc.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Organ-at-risk sparing with dynamic trajectory radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: comparison with volumetric arc therapy on a publicly available library of cases.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2022Article
- Clinical implementation of HyperArc.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2022Article
- HyperArc VMAT stereotactic radiotherapy for locally recurrent previously-irradiated head and neck cancers: Plan quality, treatment delivery accuracy, and efficiency.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Effect of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Combined with Thermoplastic Fixation on Set-Up Errors in Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Radiotherapy.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- The new SRS/FSRT technique HyperArc for benign brain lesions: a dosimetric analysis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Automated Non-Coplanar VMAT for Dose Escalation in Recurrent Head and Neck Cancer Patients.Cancers · 2021Article
- Automated Non-coplanar Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning for Maxillary Sinus Carcinoma.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate dosimetric differences of salvage irradiations using two commercially available volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) techniques: RapidArc (RA) and HyperArc (HA), for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) after initial radiation therapy.
methodsTen patients with recurrent NPC status previously treated with radiation therapy were considered suitable candidates for salvage SBRT using VMAT approach. Two separate treatment plans were created with HA and RA techniques for each case, with dosimetric outcomes compared with respect to tumor target coverage and organs-at-risk (OARs) sparing. Furthermore, the cumulative radiobiological effects to the relevant OARs from the original radiotherapy to the respective salvage SBRT plans were analyzed in terms of biologically effective dose (BED).
resultsTreatment with HA exhibited similar target dose coverage as with RA, while delivering a higher mean dose to the targets. Using RA technique, the mean maximal doses to optic apparatus and the mean brain dose were reduced by 1 to 1.5 Gy, comparing to HA technique. The conformity index, gradient radius, and intermediate dose spillage in HA plans were significantly better than those in RA. With HA technique, the volume of brain receiving 12 Gy or more was reduced by 44%, comparing to RA technique. The cumulative BEDs to spinal cord and optic apparatus with RA technique were 1 to 2 Gy
conclusionsWith better dose distribution than RA while maintaining sufficient target dose coverage, HA represents an attractive salvage SBRT technique for recurrent NPC.
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.