ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2024
In Silico Analysis of Adjuvant Head and Neck Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Cone Beam Computed Tomography in Oral Cancer: A Scoping Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Recently developed online adaptive radiation therapy (OnART) systems enable frequent treatment plan adaptation, but data supporting a dosimetric benefit in postoperative head and neck radiation therapy (RT) are sparse. We performed an in silico dosimetric study to assess the potential benefits of a single versus weekly OnART in the treatment of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the adjuvant setting. Methods and Materials: Twelve patients receiving conventionally fractionated RT over 6 weeks and 12 patients receiving hypofractionated RT over 3 weeks on a clinical trial were analyzed. The OnART emulator was used to virtually adapt either once midtreatment or weekly based on the patient's routinely performed cone beam computed tomography. The planning target volume (PTV) coverage, dose heterogeneity, and cumulative dose to the organs at risk for these 2 adaptive approaches were compared with the nonadapted plan. Results: In total, 13, 8, and 3 patients had oral cavity, oropharynx, and larynx primaries, respectively. In the conventionally fractionated RT cohort, weekly OnART led to a significant improvement in PTV V100% coverage (6.2%), hot spot (-1.2 Gy), and maximum cord dose (-3.1 Gy), whereas the mean ipsilateral parotid dose increased modestly (1.8 Gy) versus the nonadapted plan. When adapting once midtreatment, PTV coverage improved with a smaller magnitude (0.2%-2.5%), whereas dose increased to the ipsilateral parotid (1.0-1.1 Gy) and mandible (0.2-0.7 Gy). For the hypofractionated RT cohort, similar benefit was observed with weekly OnART, including significant improvement in PTV coverage, hot spot, and maximum cord dose, whereas no consistent dosimetric advantage was seen when adapting once midtreatment. Conclusions: For head and neck squamous cell carcinoma adjuvant RT, there was a limited benefit of single OnART, but weekly adaptations meaningfully improved the dosimetric criteria, predominantly PTV coverage and dose heterogeneity. A prospective study is ongoing to determine the clinical benefit of OnART in this setting.
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.