ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Effect of Deep Inspiration Breath Hold on Normal Tissue Sparing With Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus Proton Therapy for Mediastinal Lymphoma.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical implementation of intensity modulated proton therapy in breath-hold for mediastinal lymphoma patients using surface monitoring and nasal high-flow therapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Improved organs-of-interest dose reduction potential with intensity modulated proton therapy and breath-hold in mediastinal lymphoma.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Trends in Radiation Use from 2004 to 2020 among Adolescents and Young Adults with Hodgkin Lymphoma.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- A review of the clinical introduction of 4D particle therapy research concepts.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Review
- Deep inspiration breath-hold for mediastinal lymphoma patients: Evaluation of a 5-year service.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2022Article
- Proton Therapy in Supradiaphragmatic Lymphoma: Predicting Treatment-Related Mortality to Help Optimize Patient Selection.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2022Article
- Harnessing benefit of highly conformal RT techniques for lymphoma patients.The British journal of radiology · 2021Review
- Dosimetry, Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-Effectiveness of Proton Therapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2021Review
- Development and Implementation of Proton Therapy for Hodgkin Lymphoma: Challenges and Perspectives.Cancers · 2021Review
- Proton Radiation Therapy After Chemotherapy in the Management of Aggressive Mediastinal Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas: A Particle Therapy Cooperative Group Lymphoma Subcommittee Collaboration.Advances in radiation oncologyArticle
- A Planning Comparison of IMRT vs. Pencil Beam Scanning for Deep Inspiration Breath Hold Lung Cancers.Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical DosimetristsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIntensity modulated radiation therapy delivered with deep-inspiration breath hold (IMRT-BH) provides favorable normal tissue dosimetric profiles when treating patients with mediastinal lymphoma. However, it is unclear if IMRT-BH plans are comparable to free breathing (FB) proton plans. We performed a retrospective, comparative dosimetric study between IMRT-BH and FB passive scatter proton therapy (P-FB) or intensity modulated proton therapy (IMPT-FB). Hypothesizing that BH would provide superior normal tissue sparing when added to proton therapy, we also compared plans to passive scatter BH (P-BH). METHODS AND MATERIALS: For 15 patients who received involved-site RT with "butterfly" IMRT-BH, 3 additional proton plans (P-FB, IMPT-FB, P-BH) were optimized to deliver 30.6 Gy/Gy relative biological effectiveness. Dosimetric variables (mean dose, V30, V25, V15, and V5) for organs at risk (OARs) were calculated and compared using nonparametric Wilcoxon signed-rank tests.
resultsOf 57 studied OAR parameters, IMRT-BH plans were comparable in 37 (65%) parameters with P-FB plans, 32 (56%) of IMPT-FB parameters, and 30 (53%) of P-BH parameters. Doses to breasts were generally equivalent among plans while esophageal dosing was worse with IMRT-BH. Mean doses and V5 of the total lung and heart were the highest with IMRT-BH; however, IMRT-BH resulted in comparable coronary and superior lung V30 relative to proton plans. The addition of BH with proton therapy resulted in the greatest lung sparing, with mean lung dose reductions of 11% to 38%.
conclusionsThe use of BH with IMRT reduces the disparity in OAR doses with equivalence achieved in nearly two-thirds of OAR metrics compared with P-FB and 50% compared with IMPT-BH. Because each modality exhibited unique benefits, personalization of modality selection is recommended. Proton therapy via BH provides additional benefits in heart and lung sparing.
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.