Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36514118›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2022

Radiobiological and dosimetric comparison of 60Co versus 192Ir high-dose-rate intracavitary-interstitial brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

Aiping Wen, Xianliang Wang, Bingjie Wang, Chuanjun Yan, Jingyue Luo, Pei Wang, Jie Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Aiping WenSchool of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610054, China.
Xianliang WangSchool of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610054, China.
Bingjie WangDepartment of Health Technology and Informatics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hongkong, 999077, China.
Chuanjun YanDepartment of Oncology, The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, 646000, Sichuan, China.
Jingyue LuoSchool of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610054, China.
Pei WangSchool of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610054, China. dengwangpei@163.com.
Jie LiSchool of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610054, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNAffiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University · CNHong Kong Polytechnic University · HK

Funding

Medical Engineering Innovation Fund for Cancer No. ZYGX2021YGCX002Sichuan Science and Technology Program No. 2022YFG0194, No. 2022YFS0047, No. 2021YFG0320
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh-dose-rate (HDR) intracavitary-interstitial brachytherapy (IC-ISBT) is an effective treatment for bulky, middle, and advanced cervical cancer. In this study, we compared the differences between 60Co and 192Ir HDR IC-ISBT plans in terms of radiobiological and dosimetric parameters, providing a reference for clinical workers in brachytherapy.

methodsA total of 30 patients with cervical cancer receiving HDR IC-ISBT were included in this study, and IC-ISBT plans for each individual were designed with both 60Co and 192Ir at a prescribed dose of CTV D90 = 6 Gy while keeping the dose to OARs as low as possible. Physical dose and dose-volume parameters of CTV and OARs were extracted from TPS. The EQD2, EUBED, EUD, TCP, and NTCP were calculated using corresponding formulas. The differences between the 60Co and 192Ir IC-ISBT plans were compared using the paired t-test.

resultsIn each patient's 60Co and 192Ir IC-ISBT plan, the average physical dose and EQD2 of 60Co were lower than those of 192Ir, and there were statistically significant differences in D2cc and D1cc for the OARs (p < 0.05); there were statistically significant differences in D0.1 cc for the bladder (p < 0.05) and no significant differences in D0.1 cc for the rectum or intestines (p > 0.05). The EUBED ratio (60Co/192Ir) at the CTV was mostly close to 1 when neither 60Co or 192Ir passed their half-lives or when both passed two half-lives, and the difference between them was not significant; at the OARs, the mean value of 60Co was lower than that of 192Ir. There was no statistical difference between 60Co and 192Ir in the EUD (93.93 versus 93.92 Gy, p > 0.05) and TCP (97.07% versus 97.08%, p > 0.05) of the tumors. The mean NTCP value of 60Co was lower than that of 192Ir.

conclusionsConsidering the CTV and OARs, the dosimetric parameters of 60Co and 192Ir are comparable. Compared with 192Ir, the use of 60Co for HDR IC-ISBT can ensure a similar tumor control probability while providing better protection to the OARs. In addition, 60Co has obvious economic advantages and can be promoted as a good alternative to 192Ir.

Indexed as

BrachytherapyUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCobalt RadioisotopesFemaleHumansIridium RadioisotopesOrgans at RiskRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedCobalt-60Cobalt RadioisotopesIridium-192Iridium Radioisotopes192Ir60CoCervical cancerHDR brachytherapyIC-ISBT

Identifiers

PMID36514118
PMCPMC9749337
OpenAlexW4311326433

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.