ArticleRadiological physics and technology2021
Evaluation of the dosimetric impact of heart function-based volumetric modulated arc therapy planning in patients with esophageal cancer.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Radiotherapy for esophageal cancer entails high-dose irradiation of the myocardium owing to its close anatomical proximity to the esophagus. This study aimed to evaluate the dosimetric impact of functional avoidance planning for the myocardium with volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with esophageal cancer and determine the feasibility of functional planning. Ten patients with early stage esophageal cancer were included in this study. The prescribed dose was 60 Gy administered in 30 fractions. An experienced physician contoured the left ventricle (LV) of the myocardium. For each patient, an anatomical plan (non-LV-sparing plan) and a functional plan (LV-sparing plan) were created using the VMAT. In the functional plan, the mean percentage of LV volume receiving a dose of ≥ 30 and ≥ 40 Gy was 6.0% ± 6.7% and 2.4% ± 2.7%, respectively, whereas in the anatomical plan, they were 11.7% ± 13.1% and 4.9% ± 6.5%, respectively. There were no significant differences with respect to the dose to the hottest 1 cm
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.