ArticleRadiation oncology journal2024
Comparison of radiotherapy techniques in patients with thymic epithelial tumor who underwent postoperative radiotherapy.
Article in Radiation oncology journal, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis retrospective study aimed to compare clinical outcomes and dosimetric parameters between radiation therapy (RT) techniques in patients with thymic epithelial tumor (TET). MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom January 2016 to December 2020, 101 patients with TET received adjuvant RT (median, 52.8 Gy; range, 48.4 to 66.0). Three different RT techniques were compared: three-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT; n = 59, 58.4%), intensity-modulated RT (IMRT; n = 23, 22.8%), and proton beam therapy (PBT; n = 19, 18.8%).
resultsThe median age of the patients and the follow-up period were 55 years (range, 28 to 79) and 43.4 months (range, 7.7 to 77.2). Patients in the PBT group were of the youngest age (mean age, 45.4 years), while those in IMRT group had the largest clinical target volume (mean volume, 149.6 mL). Patients in the PBT group had a lower mean lung dose (4.4 Gy vs. 7.6 Gy vs. 10.9 Gy, respectively; p < 0.001), lower mean heart dose (5.4 Gy vs. 10.0 Gy vs. 13.1 Gy, respectively; p = 0.003), and lower mean esophageal dose than patients in the 3D-CRT and IMRT groups (6.3 Gy vs. 9.8 Gy vs. 13.5 Gy, respectively; p = 0.011). Twenty patients (19.8%) showed disease recurrence, and seven patients (6.9%) died. The differences in the survival rates between RT groups were not statistically significant.
conclusionIn patients with TET who underwent adjuvant RT, PBT resulted in a lower dose of exposure to adjacent organs at risk. Survival outcomes for patients in PBT group were not significantly different from those in other groups.
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.