Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35115610›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2022

Reproducibility of repeated breathhold and impact of breathhold failure in whole breast and regional nodal irradiation in prone crawl position.

Pieter Deseyne, Bruno Speleers, Leen Paelinck, Werner De Gersem, Wilfried De Neve, Max Schoepen, Annick Van Greveling, Hans Van Hulle, Vincent Vakaet, Giselle Post and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05179161 (Validation of Prone Crawl Radiotherapy for Whole-breast Irradiation After Breast Conserving Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

NCT05179161 nacompletednot on this map

Validation of Prone Crawl Radiotherapy for Whole-breast Irradiation After Breast Conserving Surgery

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, GhentRan2016 to 2017Enrolled40ConditionsBreast Cancer FemaleArmsProne crawl positioning
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

13 authors.

Pieter DeseyneDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. pieter.deseyne@uzgent.be.
Bruno SpeleersDepartment of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Leen PaelinckDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Werner De GersemDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Wilfried De NeveDepartment of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Max SchoepenDepartment of Industrial Systems Engineering and Product Design, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Annick Van GrevelingDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Hans Van HulleDepartment of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Vincent VakaetDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Giselle PostDepartment of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Chris MontenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Herman DepypereDepartment of Human Structure and Repair, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Liv VeldemanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In whole breast and regional nodal irradiation (WB + RNI), breathhold increases organ at risk (OAR) sparing. WB + RNI is usually performed in supine position, because positioning materials obstruct beam paths in prone position. Recent advancements allow prone WB + RNI (pWB + RNI) with increased sparing of OARs compared to supine WB + RNI. We evaluate positional and dosimetrical impact of repeated breathhold (RBH) and failure to breathhold (FTBH) in pWB + RNI. Twenty left-sided breast cancer patients were scanned twice in breathhold (baseline and RBH) and once free breathing (i.e. FTBH). Positional impact was evaluated using overlap index (OI) and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Dosimetrical impact was assessed by beam transposition from the baseline plan. Mean OI and DSC ranges were 0.01-0.98 and 0.01-0.92 for FTBH, and 0.73-1 and 0.69-1 for RBH. Dosimetric impact of RBH was negligible. FTBH significantly decreased minimal dose to CTV WBI, level II and the internal mammary nodes, with adequate mean doses. FTBH significantly increased heart, LAD, left lung and esophagus dose. OI and DSC for RBH and FTBH show reproducible large ROI positions. Small ROIs show poor overlap. FTBH maintained adequate target coverage but increased heart, LAD, ipsilateral lung and esophagus dose. RBH is a robust technique in pWB + RNI. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05179161, registered 05/01/2022).

Indexed as

Breath HoldingPatient PositioningProne PositionRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAdultAgedDose Fractionation, RadiationFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMiddle AgedOrgans at RiskRadiotherapy, AdjuvantTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID35115610
PMCPMC8814154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.