ArticleTechnology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine2024
Observations of the effectiveness, dosage, and prognosis of intensity-modulated radiation therapy under ultrasonic guidance for cervical cancer patients.
Article in Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine, 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, 0 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVolumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) guided by ultrasound is a novel radiation therapy technique that facilitates the delineation of the tumor target area under image guidance, enhancing the precision of radiation therapy and maximizing the protection of surrounding tissues.
objectiveThe objective of this paper is to investigate the effectiveness of VMAT under ultrasonic guidance for cervical cancer patients and its impact on radiotherapy dosage and prognosis.
methodsA retrospective analysis encompassed 128 instances of cervical cancer patients who were admitted to our medical facility between April 2019 and April 2021. The patients were categorized into an observation cohort and a control cohort, depending on variations in treatment modalities post-admission. The control group underwent conventional radiotherapy, whereas the observation group received VMAT guided by ultrasound. Clinical efficacy, average radiation dosages (in the radiotherapy target area, rectum, and bladder), radiotherapy-related toxicities during treatment, and one-year survival rates were compared between the two groups. Additionally, variances in pre- and post-treatment serum levels of squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC-Ag), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), and carbohydrate antigen 724 (CA724) were subjected to assessment.
resultsWhen compared to the control group (64.52%), the observation cohort's comprehensive effectiveness rate was considerably greater (80.30%). The observation group saw lower average radiation exposures and a reduction in the post-treatment concentrations of CEA, SCC-Ag, and CA724. The overall incidence of adverse effects from radiation treatment also declined. The observation group had a greater one-year survival rate (90.48%) than the control group (73.33%). When comparing the observation cohort to the control group, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a significantly higher one-year survival rate (Log-Rank = 6.530, P= 0.011).
conclusionVMAT guided by ultrasound for patients with cervical cancer demonstrates promising short- and long-term treatment outcomes. It also leads to improvements in serum CEA, SCC-Ag, and CA724 levels, as well as reductions in the average radiation dosages to the radiotherapy target area, rectum, and bladder. This approach warrants attention from clinicians in clinical practice.
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.