ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology
Comparison of Craniospinal Irradiation Using Proton Beams According to Irradiation Method and Initial Experience Treating Pediatric Patients.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for treatment-related sensorineural hearing loss and hearing aid use in medulloblastoma patients: an observational cohort study.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Observational
- Successful Implementation of Image-Guided Pencil-Beam Scanning Proton Therapy in Medulloblastomas.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study compared craniospinal irradiation using proton beam therapy (PBT) according to irradiation method and investigated the initial effects. Methods and Materials: Twenty-four pediatric patients (1-24 years old) who received proton craniospinal irradiation were examined. Passive scattered PBT (PSPT) and intensity modulated PBT (IMPT) were used in 8 and 16 patients, respectively. The whole vertebral body technique was used for 13 patients <10 years old, and the vertebral body sparing (VBS) technique was used for the remaining 11 patients aged ≥10 years. The follow-up period was 17 to 44 (median, 27) months. Organ-at-risk and planning target volume (PTV) doses and other clinical data were examined. Results: The maximum lens dose using IMPT was lower than that using PSPT ( Conclusions: IMPT is better than PSPT at reducing the dose to the lens. The VBS technique can decrease the doses to neck-chest-abdomen organs. The PTV coverage of IMPT is superior to that of PSPT.
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.