Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33517860›Full record

ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment

Dosimetric Comparison of Helical Tomotherapy, Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy, and Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy for Angiosarcoma of the Scalp.

Tomoki Mizuno, Natsuo Tomita, Taiki Takaoka, Masashi Tomida, Hiroshi Fukuma, Takahiro Tsuchiya, Yuta Shibamoto

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tomoki MizunoDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.
Natsuo TomitaDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4601-0119
Taiki TakaokaNarita Memorial Proton Center, Toyohashi, Aichi, Japan.
Masashi TomidaNarita Memorial Proton Center, Toyohashi, Aichi, Japan.
Hiroshi FukumaDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.
Takahiro TsuchiyaDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.
Yuta ShibamotoDepartment of Radiology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4255-8611
Nagoya City University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Proton TherapyRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedFemaleHead and Neck NeoplasmsHemangiosarcomaHumansMaleOrgans at RiskRadiometryRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedScalpSkin NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeangiosarcomadosimetryIMPTscalptomotherapyVMAT

Identifiers

PMID33517860
PMCPMC7871283
OpenAlexW3128549100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.