Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37129312›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2023

Clinical outcome after pencil beam scanning proton therapy and dysphagia/xerostomia NTCP calculations of proton and photon radiotherapy delivered to patients with cancer of the major salivary glands.

Marc Andrea Walser, Nicolas Bachmann, Jonas Kluckert, A Köthe, Carson Tully, Dominic Leiser, Antony John Lomax, Nicola Bizzocchi, Johannes Albertus Langendijk, Damien C Weber

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marc Andrea WalserCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1805-8978
Nicolas BachmannCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
Jonas KluckertCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
A KötheCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
Carson TullyCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
Dominic LeiserCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
Antony John LomaxCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
Nicola BizzocchiCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
Johannes Albertus LangendijkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Damien C WeberCenter for Proton Therapy, Paul Scherrer Institute, ETH Domain, CH-5232 Villigen, Switzerland.
Paul Scherrer Institute · CHUniversity of Bern · CHUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe purpose of this study is to report the oncological outcome, observed toxicities and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) calculation for pencil beam scanning (PBS) PT delivered to salivary gland tumour (SGT) patients.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 26 SGT patients treated with PBSPT (median dose, 67.5 Gy(RBE)) between 2005 and 2020 at our institute. Toxicities were recorded according to CTCAEv.4.1. Overall survival (OS), local control (LC), locoregional control (LRC) and distant control (DC) were estimated. For all patients, a photon plan was re-calculated in order to assess the photon/proton NTCP.

resultsWith a median follow-up time of 46 months (range, 3-118), 5 (19%), 2 (8%), 3 (12%) and 2 (8%) patients presented after PT with distant, local, locoregional failures and death, respectively. The estimated 4 year OS, LC, LCR and DC were 90%, 90%, 87 and 77%, respectively. Grade 3 late toxicity was observed in 2 (8%) patients. The estimated 4 year late high-grade (≥3) toxicity-free survival was 78.4%. The calculated mean difference of NTCP-values after PBSPT and VMAT plans for developing Grade 2 or 3 xerostomia were 3.8 and 2.9%, respectively. For Grade 2-3 dysphagia, the grade corresponding percentages were 8.6 and 1.9%. Not using an up-front model-based approach to select patients for PT, only 40% of our patients met the Dutch eligibility criteria.

conclusionOur data suggest excellent oncological outcome and low late toxicity rates for patients with SGT treated with PBSPT. NTCP calculation showed a substantial risk reduction for Grade 2 or 3 xerostomia and dysphagia in some SGT patients, while for others, no clear benefit was seen with protons, suggesting that comparative planning should be performed routinely for these patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: We have reported that the clinical outcome of SGT patients treated with PT and compared IMPT to VMAT for the treatment of salivary gland tumour and have observed that protons delivered significantly less dose to organs at risks and were associated with less NTCP for xerostomia and dysphagia. Noteworthy, not using an up-front model-based approach, only 40% of our patients met the Dutch eligibility criteria.

Indexed as

Deglutition DisordersOropharyngeal NeoplasmsProton TherapyRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedXerostomiaHumansProbabilityProtonsRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedRetrospective StudiesSalivary GlandsProtons

Identifiers

PMID37129312
PMCPMC10392657
OpenAlexW4367668480

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.