Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35008308›Full record

ArticleCancers2021

Comparison and Evaluation of Different Radiotherapy Techniques Using Biodosimetry Based on Cytogenetics.

Aggeliki Nikolakopoulou, Vasiliki Peppa, Antigoni Alexiou, George Pissakas, Georgia Terzoudi, Pantelis Karaiskos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Aggeliki NikolakopoulouLaboratory of Health Physics, Radiobiology & Cytogenetics, Institute of Nuclear & Radiological Sciences & Technology, Energy & Safety, National Centre for Scientific Research ''Demokritos'', 15310 Athens, Greece.
Vasiliki PeppaMedical Physics Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-6742-1278
Antigoni AlexiouRadiotherapy Department, General Hospital of Athens Alexandra, 11528 Athens, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-3333-3990
George PissakasRadiotherapy Department, General Hospital of Athens Alexandra, 11528 Athens, Greece.
Georgia TerzoudiLaboratory of Health Physics, Radiobiology & Cytogenetics, Institute of Nuclear & Radiological Sciences & Technology, Energy & Safety, National Centre for Scientific Research ''Demokritos'', 15310 Athens, Greece.ORCID 0000-0001-6213-5072
Pantelis KaraiskosMedical Physics Laboratory, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece.

Funding

NCSRD - INRASTES research activities in the framework of the national RIS3 MIS 5002559
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While rapid technological advances in radiotherapy techniques have led to a more precise delivery of radiation dose and to a decreased risk of side effects, there is still a need to evaluate the efficacy of the new techniques estimating the biological dose and to investigate the radiobiological impact of the protracted radiotherapy treatment duration. The aim of this study is to compare, at a cytogenetic level, advanced radiotherapy techniques VMAT and IMRT with the conventional 3D-CRT, using biological dosimetry. A dicentric biodosimetry assay based on the frequency of dicentrics chromosomes scored in peripheral blood lymphocytes from prostate cancer patients and PC3 human prostate cancer cell line was used. For each patient blood sample and each subpopulation of the cultured cell line, three different irradiations were performed using the 3D-CRT, IMRT, and VMAT technique. The absorbed dose was estimated with the biodosimetry method based on the induced dicentric chromosomes. The results showed a statistically significant underestimation of the biological absorbed dose of ~6% for the IMRT and VMAT compared to 3D-CRT irradiations for peripheral blood lymphocytes, whereas IMRT and VMAT results were comparable without a statistically significant difference, although slightly lower values were observed for VMAT compared to IMRT irradiation. Similar results were obtained using the PC3 cell line. The observed biological dose underestimation could be associated with the relative decreased dose rate and increase irradiation time met in modulated techniques compared to the conventional 3D-CRT irradiations.

Indexed as

biodosimetryradiation dosimetryradiobiological techniquesradiotherapyVMAT

Identifiers

PMID35008308
PMCPMC8749890

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.