Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33231258›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiation research2021

Comparison of predictive performance for toxicity by accumulative dose of DVH parameter addition and DIR addition for cervical cancer patients.

Yuya Miyasaka, Noriyuki Kadoya, Rei Umezawa, Yoshiki Takayama, Kengo Ito, Takaya Yamamoto, Shohei Tanaka, Suguru Dobashi, Ken Takeda, Kenji Nemoto and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of radiation research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yuya MiyasakaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Noriyuki KadoyaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Rei UmezawaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Yoshiki TakayamaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Kengo ItoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Takaya YamamotoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Shohei TanakaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Suguru DobashiCourse of Radiological Technology, Health Sciences, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Ken TakedaCourse of Radiological Technology, Health Sciences, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Kenji NemotoDepartment of Radiology, Yamagata University Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata, Japan.
Takeo IwaiDepartment of Heavy Particle Medical Science, Yamagata University Graduate School of Medical Science, Yamagata, Japan.
Keiichi JinguDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Tohoku University · JPYamagata University · JPKanagawa Cancer Center

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We compared predictive performance between dose volume histogram (DVH) parameter addition and deformable image registration (DIR) addition for gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity in cervical cancer patients. A total of 59 patients receiving brachytherapy and external beam radiotherapy were analyzed retrospectively. The accumulative dose was calculated by three methods: conventional DVH parameter addition, full DIR addition and partial DIR addition. ${D}_{2{cm}^3}$, ${D}_{1{cm}^3}$ and ${D}_{0.1{cm}^3}$ (minimum doses to the most exposed 2 cm3, 1cm3 and 0.1 cm3 of tissue, respectively) of the rectum and sigmoid were calculated by each method. V50, V60 and V70 Gy (volume irradiated over 50, 60 and 70 Gy, respectively) were calculated in full DIR addition. The DVH parameters were compared between toxicity (≥grade1) and non-toxicity groups. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were compared to evaluate the predictive performance of each method. The differences between toxicity and non-toxicity groups in ${D}_{2{cm}^3}$ were 0.2, 5.7 and 3.1 Gy for the DVH parameter addition, full DIR addition and partial DIR addition, respectively. The AUCs of ${D}_{2{cm}^3}$ were 0.51, 0.67 and 0.57 for DVH parameter addition, full DIR addition and partial DIR addition, respectively. In full DIR addition, the difference in dose between toxicity and non-toxicity was the largest and AUC was the highest. AUCs of V50, V60 and V70 Gy were 0.51, 0.63 and 0.62, respectively, and V60 and V70 were high values close to the value of ${D}_{2{cm}^3}$ of the full DIR addition. Our results suggested that the full DIR addition may have the potential to predict toxicity more accurately than the conventional DVH parameter addition, and that it could be more effective to accumulate to all pelvic irradiation by DIR.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy DosageAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveDose-Response Relationship, RadiationFemaleHumansMiddle AgedTumor BurdenUterine Cervical Neoplasmsbrachytherapycervical cancerdeformable image registrationdose accumulationGI toxicity

Identifiers

PMID33231258
PMCPMC7779363
OpenAlexW3110642974

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.