ArticleRadiation and environmental biophysics2024
A comparative dose-escalation analysis for reirradiated cancer patients with and without appropriate dose mapping.
Article in Radiation and environmental biophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to compare dose escalation between two groups of reirradiated cancer patients, one with the previous contour and radiotherapy plan available on the treatment planning system and the other without. First group is identified as DICOM-group, while the other one is called non-DICOM group. The current study included 89 patients, 57 in the DICOM, and 32 in the non-DICOM group, who received reirradiation for recurrent or second primary tumours between 2019 and 2021. For the DICOM group, doses to 0.2cc volume for spine, brainstem, and optic apparatus from first radiation were converted into structures and transferred to reirradiation CT using deformable registration. First, one radiotherapy plan was created using the doctor prescribed dose (baseline prescription RxD_B); further an escalated dose (RxD_E) plan, taking into account all the dose volume parameters from previous radiation, was created only for DICOM group. In non-DICOM group patients were planned only for RxD_B. The maximum accepted dose escalation was 21 Gy. Radiotherapy prescription dose during earlier (first) treatment in DICOM and non-DICOM groups were 61 ± 5.6 Gy and 30-66 Gy, respectively. DICOM and non-DICOM groups had nearly identical baseline doses: 52.5 ± 10.7 Gy and 50.6 ± 6.9 Gy (difference 1.9 ± 12.7 Gy). Dose escalation was possible for 51 out of 57 patients in the DICOM-group. Average escalated dose in DICOM-group was 59.2 ± 6.2 Gy, with an incremental dose of 6.7 ± 12.4 Gy from the baseline prescription. No dose escalation was opted for in the non-DICOM group due to the unavailability of dose volume information from previous radiation. Reirradiation for head and neck cases allowed for a moderate to high dose escalation, facilitated by the presence of pertinent DICOM information from the initial radiotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38078988What 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.