ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Is a high-risk clinical target volume required? Evaluation of the dosimetric feasibility based on T staging.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical target delineation is a primary focus in the field of radiotherapy. This study aimed to investigate whether high-risk clinical target volume can be removed in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients with different T stages. Materials and methods: We designed a test plan without the high-risk clinical target volume for 111 nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients and further compared the test plans with the treatment plans in the parameters of planning target volumes and the radiation dose to normal organs. Results: Our data showed that when high-risk clinical target volume was abnegated, target coverage, conformity indices, and homogeneity indices of planning target volumes and doses of normal organs were not influenced in the T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients, and more than 95% of the high-risk planning target volume area could still be covered by the 60 Gy dose line. However, only some T1-3 patients achieved the ideal dose coverage, and even fewer after induction chemotherapy (62.8% vs. 41.2%, Conclusion: Omitting high risk clinical target volume can be considered in patients with T4 nasopharyngeal carcinoma according to physical evaluations. However, this approach is only suitable for a specific subset of T1-3 patients.
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.