Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36606300›Full record

ArticleRadiation oncology journal2022

Stereotactic radiosurgery for limited brain metastasis using three different techniques: helical tomotherapy, volumetric modulated arc therapy, and cone-based LINAC radiosurgery.

Bongkot Jia-Mahasap, Chakri Madla, Patumrat Sripan, Imjai Chitapanarux, Ekkasit Tharavichitkul, Somvilai Chakrabandhu, Pitchayaponne Klunklin, Wimrak Onchan

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiation oncology journal, 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
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bongkot Jia-MahasapDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Chakri MadlaDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Patumrat SripanResearch Institute for Health Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Imjai ChitapanaruxDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Ekkasit TharavichitkulDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Somvilai ChakrabandhuDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Pitchayaponne KlunklinDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Wimrak OnchanDivision of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Chiang Mai University · TH

Funding

Faculty of Medicine Research Found, Chiang Mai University 139/2561
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSpecific radiation delivered to tumors by stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has become widely used in the treatment of brain metastasis. This study aimed to compare radiation therapy planning and its parameters from SRS using three different modalities: helical tomotherapy (HT), volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and cone-based linac radiosurgery (Cone-based). MATERIALS AND

methodsEach contouring dataset of patents who experienced one to four brain metastasis received SRS in our center was re-planned to create radiation therapy planning in all three treatment systems (HT, VMAT, and Cone-based). The parameters of conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), CI50, and gradient index (CGI) were analyzed to compare the effects of the three techniques. Decision score analysis was used to evaluate the performance on dosimetric and organs-at-risk parameters among the different techniques by applying the Cone-based technique as a benchmark.

resultsA total of 21 patients with 39 lesions were included in this study. The results from the decision score analysis demonstrated statistically identical CI, CI50, and CGI values between Cone-based and VMAT for single lesions. For multiple lesions, VMAT also provided better CI when compared to Cone-based technique while HT exhibited the poorest dosimetric parameters. Moreover, VMAT exhibited the lowest BrainV5Gy value and displayed the shortest beam-on time calculation.

conclusionWe have conducted a comprehensive comparison of SRS planning approaches. The Cone-based technique revealed the highest HI value, while VMAT provided the best estimated beam-on time value. HT displayed a feasible SRS modality for single lesions, but not for multiple lesions.

Indexed as

Cone-based linac radiosurgeryHelical tomotherapyStereotactic radiosurgeryVolumetric modulated arc therapy

Identifiers

PMID36606300
PMCPMC9830036
OpenAlexW4313413130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.