Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37321676›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiation research2023

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with the central shielding technique for patients with uterine cervical cancer†.

Akira Torii, Natsuo Tomita, Mayu Kuno, Masahiro Nishio, Yuki Yamada, Taiki Takaoka, Dai Okazaki, Masanari Niwa, Nozomi Kita, Seiya Takano and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 87% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Akira ToriiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Natsuo TomitaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Mayu KunoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ichinomiya Municipal Hospital, 2-2-22 Bunkyo, Ichinomiya, Aichi 491-8558, Japan.
Masahiro NishioDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kasugai Municipal Hospital, 1-1-1 Takaki-cho, Kasugai, Aichi 486-8510, Japan.
Yuki YamadaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Konan Kosei Hospital, 137 Ohmatsubara, Takaya-cho, Konan, Aichi 483-8704, Japan.
Taiki TakaokaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Dai OkazakiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Masanari NiwaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Nozomi KitaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Seiya TakanoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Takayuki MuraoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ichinomiya Municipal Hospital, 2-2-22 Bunkyo, Ichinomiya, Aichi 491-8558, Japan.
Yasutaka OgawaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kasugai Municipal Hospital, 1-1-1 Takaki-cho, Kasugai, Aichi 486-8510, Japan.
Akio HiwatashiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Nagoya City University Hospital, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8601, Japan.
Nagoya City University Hospital · JPIchinomiya Municipal City Hospital · JPKasugai Municipal Hospital · JPKonan Kosei Hospital · JP

Funding

Nagoya City University 2213003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aimed to examine outcomes and toxicities of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with the central shielding (CS) technique for patients with uterine cervical cancer. This retrospective study included 54 patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics IB-IVA cancer. Whole pelvic radiotherapy or extended-field radiotherapy were performed at the dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with helical tomotherapy (HT). Six patients had para-aortic lymph node metastases. The CS technique with HT was utilized after a total dose of 28.8-41.4 Gy to reduce doses to the rectum and bladder. The prescribed dose of intracavitary brachytherapy was mainly 18-24 Gy in three or four fractions at point A. Concurrent chemotherapy was used for 47 patients (87%). Median follow-up time was 56 months. Seventeen patients (31%) developed recurrence. The recurrence of the cervix was observed in two patients (4%). The 5-year rates of the locoregional control, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 79, 66 and 82%, respectively. Among several factors evaluated, histological type of adenocarcinoma was only a significantly worse prognostic factor for PFS by multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 4.9 [95% confidence interval, 1.3-18], P = 0.018). Grade 2 or higher late toxicities were observed in nine patients (17%). Two patients (4%) each had grade 3 proctitis and grade 3 ileus, respectively. No grade 4 toxicity or treatment-related death was observed. The results suggest that IMRT with the CS technique allows a high local control without increasing the risk of complications for cervical cancer patients.

Indexed as

BrachytherapyCarcinoma, Squamous CellRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedUterine Cervical NeoplasmsFemaleHumansRetrospective Studiesadverse effectshelical tomotherapyintensity-modulated radiotherapytreatment outcomeuterine cervical cancer

Identifiers

PMID37321676
PMCPMC10354837
OpenAlexW4380854574

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.