Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33458265›Full record

ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2019

Optimizing laryngeal sparing with intensity modulated radiotherapy or volumetric modulated arc therapy for unilateral tonsil cancer.

Amy C Moreno, Christopher Wilke, He Wang, Shi-Ming Samuel Tung, Courtney Pollard, Adam S Garden, William H Morrison, David I Rosenthal, Clifton D Fuller, Gary B Gunn and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 95% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Amy C MorenoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Christopher WilkeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
He WangDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Shi-Ming Samuel TungDepartment of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Courtney PollardDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Adam S GardenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
William H MorrisonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
David I RosenthalDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Clifton D FullerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Gary B GunnDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Jay P ReddyDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Shalin J ShahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Steven J FrankDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Vinita TakiarDepartment of Radiation Oncology at the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Jack PhanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Cincinnati · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeMinimizing radiation dose exposure to nearby organs is key to limiting clinical toxicities associated with radiotherapy. Several treatment modalities such as split- or whole-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (SF-IMRT, WF-IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) are being used to treat tonsillar cancer patients with unilateral neck radiotherapy. Herein, we provide a modern dosimetric comparison of all three techniques. MATERIALS AND

methodsForty patients with tonsillar cancer treated with definitive, ipsilateral neck SF-IMRT were evaluated. Each patient was re-planned with WF-IMRT and VMAT techniques, and doses to selected organs-at-risk (OARs) including the larynx, esophagus, and brainstem were compared.

resultsNo significant differences in target coverage existed between plans; however, the heterogeneity index improved using WF-IMRT and VMAT relative to SF-IMRT. Compared to SF-IMRT, WF-IMRT and VMAT plans had significantly lower mean doses to the supraglottic larynx (31 Gy, 18.5 Gy, 17 Gy; p < 0.01), the MDACC-defined larynx (13.4 Gy, 10.5 Gy, 9.8 Gy; p < 0.01), and RTOG-defined larynx (15.8 Gy, 12.1 Gy, 11.1 Gy; p < 0.01), respectively. Mean esophageal dose was lowest with SF-IMRT over WF-IMRT and VMAT (5.9 Gy, 12.2 Gy, 11.1 Gy; p < 0.01) but only in the absence of lower neck disease. On average, VMAT plans had shorter treatment times and required less monitor units than both SF-IMRT and WF-IMRT.

conclusionIn the setting of unilateral neck radiotherapy, WF-IMRT and VMAT plans can be optimized to significantly improve dose sparing of critical structures compared to SF-IMRT. VMAT offers additional advantages of shorter treatment times and fewer required monitor units.

Indexed as

DosimetryIMRTOropharynxSplit-fieldTonsillar cancerUnilateral neck radiotherapyVMAT

Identifiers

PMID33458265
PMCPMC7807534
OpenAlexW2943618355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.