Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33912459›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Dosimetric Comparison of Radiation Techniques for Comprehensive Regional Nodal Radiation Therapy for Left-Sided Breast Cancer: A Treatment Planning Study.

Heejoo Ko, Jee Suk Chang, Jin Young Moon, Won Hee Lee, Chirag Shah, Jin Sup Andy Shim, Min Cheol Han, Jong Geol Baek, Ryeong Hwang Park, Yong Bae Kim and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Hypofractionated radiotherapy in postmastectomy locally advanced breast cancer: an interim report on acute toxicities and dosimetry.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Heejoo KoCollege of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea.
Jee Suk ChangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Jin Young MoonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Won Hee LeeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Chirag ShahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Jin Sup Andy ShimNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Min Cheol HanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Jong Geol BaekDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Ryeong Hwang ParkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Yong Bae KimDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Jin Sung KimDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Yonsei University · KRCatholic University of Korea · KRCleveland Clinic · USNew York Proton Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHow modern cardiac sparing techniques and beam delivery systems using advanced x-ray and proton beam therapy (PBT) can reduce incidental radiation exposure doses to cardiac and pulmonary organs individually or in any combination is poorly investigated.

methodsAmong 15 patients with left-sided breast cancer, partial wide tangential 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) delivered in conventional fractionation (CF) or hypofractionated (HF) schedules; PBT delivered in a CF schedule; and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivered in an HF schedule, each under continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and free-breathing (FB) conditions, were examined. Target volume coverage and doses to organs-at-risk (OARs) were calculated for each technique. Outcomes were compared with one-way analysis of variance and the Bonferroni test, with

resultsTarget volume coverage was within acceptable levels in all interventions, except for the internal mammary lymph node D95 (99% in PBT, 90% in VMAT-CPAP, 84% in VMAT-FB, and 74% in 3DCRT). The mean heart dose (MHD) was the lowest in PBT (<1 Gy) and VMAT-CPAP (2.2 Gy) and the highest in 3DCRT with CF/FB (7.8 Gy), respectively. The mean lung dose (MLD) was the highest in 3DCRT-CF-FB (20 Gy) and the lowest in both VMAT-HF-CPAP and PBT (approximately 5-6 Gy). VMAT-HF-CPAP and PBT delivered a comparable maximum dose to the left ascending artery (7.2 and 6.13 Gy, respectively).

conclusionsBoth proton and VMAT in combination with CPAP can minimize the radiation exposure to heart and lung with optimal target coverage in regional RT for left-sided breast cancer. The clinical relevance of these differences is yet to be elucidated. Continued efforts are needed to minimize radiation exposures during RT treatment to maximize its therapeutic index.

Indexed as

breast neoplasmscontinuous positive airway pressureintensity-modulatedproton therapyradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID33912459
PMCPMC8072050
OpenAlexW3111071183

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.