ArticleJournal of radiation research2023
Effect of topical agents on skin surface dose in volumetric modulated arc therapy for head and neck cancer.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dosimetric effect of silicone-based gel on skin surface during volumetric modulated arc therapy for breast cancer.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025Article
- Radiation induced dermatitis by increasing triglyceride levels to induce autophagy and inhibit the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway.Lipids in health and disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), the effect of an increase in skin surface dose due to topical agents might be negligible. We investigated the bolus effects of three types of topical agents in VMAT for head and neck cancer (HNC). Topical agents of different thicknesses (0.1, 0.5 and 2 mm) were prepared. When each topical agent was set, the surface doses were measured for the anterior static field and VMAT, with and without a thermoplastic mask. No significant differences were observed among the three topical agents. For topical agent thicknesses of 0.1, 0.5 and 2 mm, the increases in surface dose for the anterior static field without the thermoplastic mask were 7-9, 30-31 and 81-84%, respectively. With the thermoplastic mask, the corresponding increases were 5, 12-15 and 41-43%, respectively. The increases in surface dose for VMAT without the thermoplastic mask were 5-8, 16-19 and 36-39%, respectively, and those with the thermoplastic mask were 4, 7-10 and 15-19%, respectively. The rate of increase in surface dose with the thermoplastic mask was smaller than that without the thermoplastic mask. The increase in surface dose with topical agents of clinical standard thickness (0.02 mm) was estimated to be 2% with the thermoplastic mask. The increase in surface dose with topical agents in dosimetric simulation, compared with control situation, is not significant in clinical conditions for HNC 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.