ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024
Single isocenter versus dual isocenter treatment using flattening filter-free and jaw-tracking volumetrically modulated arc therapy for boot-shaped lung cancer: Evaluation of dosimetric and feasibility.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single isocenter versus dual isocenter treatment using flattening filter-free and jaw-tracking volumetrically modulated arc therapy for boot-shaped lung cancer: Evaluation of dosimetric and feasibility.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo determine whether a dual-isocenter volumetrically modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique results in lower normal pulmonary dosage compared to a traditional single isocenter technique for boot-shaped lung cancer.
methodsA cohort of 15 patients with advanced peripheral or central lung cancer who had metastases in the mediastinum and supraclavicular lymph nodes was randomly selected for this retrospective study. VMAT plans were generated for each patient using two different beam alignment techniques with the 6-MV flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beam: single-isocenter jaw-tracking VMAT based on the Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator (S-TV), and dual-isocenter VMAT based on both TrueBeam (D-TV) and Halcyon linear accelerator (D-HV). For all 45 treatment plans, planning target volume (PTV) dose coverage, conformity/homogeneity index (CI/HI), mean heart dose (MHD), mean lung dose (MLD) and the total lung tissue receiving 5, 20, 30 Gy (V
resultsThe quality of the objectives of the three plans was comparable to each other. In comparison with S-TV, D-TV and D-HV improved the CI and HI of the PTV (p < 0.05). The MLD was 13.84 ± 1.44 Gy (mean ± SD) for D-TV, 14.22 ± 1.30 Gy and 14.16 ± 1.42 Gy for S-TV and D-HV, respectively. Lungs-V
conclusionsTaking into account the dosimetric results and published clinical data on radiation-induced pulmonary injury, dual-isocenter jaw-tracking VMAT may be the optimal choice for treating boot-shaped lung cancer.
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.