Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33372202›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiation research2021

Analysis of acute-phase toxicities of intensity-modulated proton therapy using a model-based approach in pharyngeal cancer patients.

Koichi Yasuda, Hideki Minatogawa, Yasuhiro Dekura, Seishin Takao, Masaya Tamura, Nayuta Tsushima, Takayoshi Suzuki, Satoshi Kano, Takatsugu Mizumachi, Takashi Mori and 12 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

22 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Koichi YasudaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Hideki MinatogawaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Yasuhiro DekuraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Seishin TakaoDepartment of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Masaya TamuraDepartment of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Nayuta TsushimaDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Takayoshi SuzukiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Satoshi KanoDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Takatsugu MizumachiDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Takashi MoriDepartment of Oral Radiology, Graduate School of Dental Medicine, Hokkaido University, Hokkaido University, North-13 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Kentaro NishiokaDepartment of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Motoyasu ShidoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Norio KatohDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Hiroshi TaguchiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Noriyuki FujimaDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Rikiya OnimaruDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Isao YokotaDepartment of Biostatistics, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Keiji KobashiDepartment of Medical Physics, Hokkaido University Hospital, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Shinichi ShimizuDepartment of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Akihiro HommaDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine,Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Hiroki ShiratoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Hidefumi AoyamaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Faculty and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-15 West-7, Sapporo, Japan.
Hokkaido University · JPHokkaido University Hospital · JPBoston University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pharyngeal cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using a model-based approach were retrospectively reviewed, and acute toxicities were analyzed. From June 2016 to March 2019, 15 pharyngeal (7 naso-, 5 oro- and 3 hypo-pharyngeal) cancer patients received IMPT with robust optimization. Simulation plans for IMPT and intensity-modulated X-ray therapy (IMXT) were generated before treatment. We also reviewed 127 pharyngeal cancer patients with IMXT in the same treatment period. In the simulation planning comparison, all of the normal-tissue complication probability values for dysphagia, dysgeusia, tube-feeding dependence and xerostomia were lower for IMPT than for IMXT in the 15 patients. After completing IMPT, 13 patients completed the evaluation, and 12 of these patients had a complete response. The proportions of patients who experienced grade 2 or worse acute toxicities in the IMPT and IMXT cohorts were 21.4 and 56.5% for dysphagia (P < 0.05), 46.7 and 76.3% for dysgeusia (P < 0.05), 73.3 and 62.8% for xerostomia (P = 0.43), 73.3 and 90.6% for mucositis (P = 0.08) and 66.7 and 76.4% for dermatitis (P = 0.42), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that IMPT was independently associated with a lower rate of grade 2 or worse dysphagia and dysgeusia. After propensity score matching, 12 pairs of IMPT and IMXT patients were selected. Dysphagia was also statistically lower in IMPT than in IMXT (P < 0.05). IMPT using a model-based approach may have clinical benefits for acute dysphagia.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPharyngeal NeoplasmsProton TherapyRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedTomography, X-Ray ComputedX-RaysYoung AdultIMPTpharyngeal cancerrobust optimization

Identifiers

PMID33372202
PMCPMC7948838
OpenAlexW3115360110

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.