Trial reportRadiation oncology (London, England)2020
Report on planning comparison of VMAT, IMRT and helical tomotherapy for the ESCALOX-trial pre-study.
Trial report in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01212354 (Phase III A Prospective, Randomized, Rater-blinded, Multicentre Interventional Clinical Trial. Do Selective Radiation Dose Escalation and Tumour Hypoxia Status Impact the Locoregional Tumour Control After Radiochemotherapy of Head & Neck Tumours?), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 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.
Phase III A Prospective, Randomized, Rater-blinded, Multicentre Interventional Clinical Trial. Do Selective Radiation Dose Escalation and Tumour Hypoxia Status Impact the Locoregional Tumour Control After Radiochemotherapy of Head & Neck Tumours?
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel DCAT plans in stereotactic body radiotherapy for stage I/II centrally located non-small-cell lung cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multimodal radiotherapy dose prediction using a multi-task deep learning model.Medical physics · 2024Article
- Improved quality of life in head and neck cancer patients treated with modern arc radiotherapy techniques - A prospective longitudinal analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Impact of delivery time factor on treatment time and plan quality in tomotherapy.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Helical tomotherapy and two types of volumetric modulated arc therapy: dosimetric and clinical comparison for several cancer sites.Radiological physics and technology · 2023Article
- Combined helical tomotherapy and Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery for high-grade recurrent orbital meningioma: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Assessment of dosimetric impact of interfractional 6D setup error in tongue cancer treated with IMRT and VMAT using daily kV-CBCT.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2023Article
- Development of a Monte Carlo based robustness calculation and evaluation tool.Medical physics · 2022Article
- Effect of the simulated half leaf width of a multileaf collimator on volumetric modulated arc therapy plan quality in hippocampal avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2022Article
- Use of Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Followed by Hypofractionated Tomotherapy With Simultaneous Integrated Boost in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Dosimetric justification for the use of volumetric modulated arc therapy in head and neck cancer-A systematic review of the literature.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Review
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe ESCALOX trial was designed as a multicenter, randomized prospective dose escalation study for head and neck cancer. Therefore, feasibility of treatment planning via different treatment planning systems (TPS) and radiotherapy (RT) techniques is essential. We hypothesized the comparability of dose distributions for simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) volumes respecting the constraints by different TPS and RT techniques.
methodsCT data sets of the first six patients (all male, mean age: 61.3 years) of the pre-study (up to 77 Gy) were used for comparison of IMRT, VMAT, and helical tomotherapy (HT). Oropharynx was the primary tumor location. Normalization of the three step SIB (77 Gy, 70 Gy, 56 Gy) was D95% = 77 Gy. Coverage (CVF), healthy tissue conformity index (HTCI), conformation number (CN), and dose homogeneity (HI) were compared for PTVs and conformation index (COIN) for parotids.
resultsAll RT techniques achieved good coverage. For SIB77Gy, CVF was best for IMRT and VMAT, HT achieved highest CN followed by VMAT and IMRT. HT reached good HTCI value, and HI compared to both other techniques. For SIB70Gy, CVF was best by IMRT. HTCI favored HT, consequently CN as well. HI was slightly better for HT. For SIB56Gy, CVF resulted comparably. Conformity favors VMAT as seen by HTCI and CN. Dmean of ipsilateral and contralateral parotids favor HT.
conclusionDifferent TPS for dose escalation reliably achieved high plan quality. Despite the very good results of HT planning for coverage, conformity, and homogeneity, the TPS also achieved acceptable results for IMRT and VMAT. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01212354, EudraCT-No.: 2010-021139-15. ARO: ARO 14-01.
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.