ArticleCancer management and research2022
A Dosimetric Study Comparing Different Radiotherapy Planning Techniques With and Without Deep Inspiratory Breath Hold for Breast Cancer.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dosimetric and radiobiological evaluations as well as technical aspects of left breast treatment employing DIBH with SGRT in radiotherapy with IMRT step and shoot, IMRT Dynamic MLC and VMAT.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Cardiac segments dosimetric benefit from deep inspiration breath hold technique for left-sided breast cancer radiotherapy.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2024Article
- Cardiac exposure in left-sided breast cancer patients undergoing deep inspiratory breath hold radiation therapy.Gland surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To analyze whether deep inspiratory breath hold (DIBH) would be dosimetrically beneficial irrespective of radiotherapy planning techniques for patients with left breast cancers requiring adjuvant radiotherapy. Methods: Planning CT scans were taken in free-breathing (FB) as well as deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) for patients requiring adjuvant radiotherapy for left breast cancers. After registration, three radiotherapy plans - 3D-conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity modulated RT (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc-therapy (VMAT) - were generated for both FB and DIBH scans for each patient. The dose-volume parameters were collected from the dose-volume histogram and analyzed. A paired Findings: The study was conducted on thirteen patients. The mean dose of the left lung was reduced with DIBH by 32%, 24%, and 6% (8.6 Gy, 6.6 Gy, and 6.4 Gy) with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT, respectively. The mean heart dose was reduced by 3.3 Gy (2.2 vs 5.5 Gy), 2.2 Gy (7.5 vs 9.7 Gy), and 1.2 Gy (5.8 vs 7 Gy) with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT with DIBH. Similarly, the left anterior descending artery (LAD) mean dose was relatively reduced by 80%, 34%, and 20% when compared with the FB scans for 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT respectively, with max dose in the 3DCRT plan. Novelty/Applications: DIBH appears to have maximum benefit in achieving a better sparing of organs-at-risk for patients being considered for 3DCRT, and to a lesser extent with even IMRT and VMAT techniques.
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.