ArticlePhysics and imaging in radiation oncology2020
A treatment planning study of combined carbon ion-beam plus photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy.
Article in Physics and imaging in radiation oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fraction optimization for hybrid proton-photon treatment planning.Medical physics · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeCombined photon intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and sequential dose-escalated carbon ion beam therapy (IBT) is a technically advanced treatment option for head and neck malignancies. We proposed and evaluated an integrated planning strategy as opposed to an established and largely separated planning workflow. MATERIALS AND
methodsTen patients with representative malignancies of the head and neck region underwent combined carbon-photon radiotherapy (RT) in our facilities. Clinical plans were created according to the separated workflow with independent optimization stages for both modalities. Experimental plans incorporated the existing carbon IBT dose distribution into the optimization stage of a step-and-shoot photon IMRT (bias dose planning).
resultsCumulative dose distributions showed statistically significant differences between the two planning strategies and were predominantly in favor of the integrated approach. As such, target irradiation was generally maintained or even improved in a subset of metrics, while normal tissue sparing was widely enhanced; for instance, in the ipsilateral temporal lobe with median D
conclusionsOur findings indicate that combination planning of carbon-photon RT for head and neck malignancies may benefit from a proposed bias dose method, yielding favorable dose distribution characteristics and a streamlined planning workflow with fewer plan revisions. Further research is necessary to validate these observations in terms of robustness and their potential for higher tumor control.
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.