ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Dosimetric Comparison of Helical Tomotherapy, Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy, and Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Angiosarcoma of the Scalp.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dosimetric impact of knowledge-based automated planning using HyperArc for angiosarcoma of the scalp.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2026Article
- Advances in proton therapy technology and global clinical applications.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Intensity-modulated proton therapy for hippocampal-sparing prophylactic cranial irradiation: a planning comparison with photon therapy.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Comparing different boost concepts and beam configurations for proton therapy of pancreatic cancer.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Total scalp irradiation using pencil beam scanning proton therapy for dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans: case study and photon dosimetric comparison-a case report.Therapeutic radiology and oncology · 2023Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Radiation Therapy for Angiosarcoma of the Scalp and Face: A Multi-Institutional Observational Study.Cancers · 2023Article
- Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with the central shielding technique for patients with uterine cervical cancer†.Journal of radiation research · 2023Article
- Dosimetric Comparison of Helical Tomotherapy and Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy in Hippocampus- and Scalp-Sparing Whole Brain Radiotherapy.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- Comparison of Absolute Dose Achievable Between Helical Tomotherapy and RapidArc in Total Dura Mater Irradiation for Child Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe compared radiotherapy plans among helical tomotherapy (HT), volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) for angiosarcoma of the scalp (AS).
methodsWe conducted a planning study for 19 patients with AS. The clinical target volume (CTV) 1 and CTV2 were defined as the gross tumor volume with a specific margin and total scalp, respectively. For HT and VMAT, the planning target volume (PTV) 1 and PTV2 were defined as CTV1 and CTV2 with 0.5-cm margins, respectively. For IMPT, robust optimization was used instead of a CTV-PTV margin (i.e. CTV robust). The targets of the HT and VMAT plans were the PTV, whereas the IMPT plans targeted the CTV robust. In total, 70 Gy and 56 Gy were prescribed as the D95% (i.e. dose to 95% volume) of PTV1 (or CTV1 robust) and PTV2 (or CTV2 robust), respectively, using the simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) technique. Other constraint goals were also defined for the target and organs at risk (OAR).
resultsAll dose constraint parameters for the target and OAR met the goals within the acceptable ranges for the 3 techniques. The coverage of the targets replaced by D95% and D98% were almost equivalent among the 3 techniques. The homogeneity index of PTV1 or CTV1 robust was equivalent among the 3 techniques, whereas that of PTV2 or CTV2 robust was significantly higher in the IMPT plans than in the other plans. IMPT reduced the Dmean of the brain and hippocampus by 49% to 95%, and the Dmax of the spinal cord, brainstem, and optic pathway by 70% to 92% compared with the other techniques.
conclusionThe 3 techniques with SIB methods provided sufficient coverage and satisfactory homogeneity for the targets, but IMPT achieved the best OAR sparing.
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.