ArticleThoracic cancer2024
The potential of integrating stereotactic ablative radiotherapy techniques with hyperfractionation for lung cancer.
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The potential of integrating stereotactic ablative radiotherapy techniques with hyperfractionation for lung cancer.Thoracic cancer · 2024Article
- Dosimetric and Radiobiological Impact of Patient Setup Errors in Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
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
backgroundLimited literature exists on the feasibility and effectiveness of integrating stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) techniques with hyperfractionated regimens for patients with lung cancer. This study aims to assess whether the SABR technique with hyperfractionation can potentially reduce lung toxicity.
methodsWe utilized the linear-quadratic model to find the optimal fraction to maximize the tumor biological equivalent dose (BED) to normal-tissue BED ratio. Validation was performed by comparing the SABR plans with 50 Gy/5 fractions and hyperfractionationed plans with 88.8 Gy/74 fractions with the same tumor BED and planning criteria for 10 patients with early-stage lung cancer. Mean lung BED, Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) normal tissue complication probability (NTCP), critical volume (CV) criteria (volume below BED of 22.92 and 25.65 Gy, and mean BED for lowest 1000 and 1500 cc) and the percentage of the lung receiving 20Gy or more (V20) were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
resultsThe transition point occurs when the tumor-to-normal tissue ratio (TNR) of the physical dose equals the TNR of α/β in the BED dose-volume histogram of the lung. Compared with the hypofractionated regimen, the hyperfractionated regimen is superior in the dose range above but inferior below the transition point. The hyperfractionated regimen showed a lower mean lung BED (6.40 Gy vs. 7.73 Gy) and NTCP (3.50% vs. 4.21%), with inferior results concerning CV criteria and higher V20 (7.37% vs. 7.03%) in comparison with the hypofractionated regimen (p < 0.01 for all).
conclusionsThe hyperfractionated regimen has an advantage in the high-dose region of the lung but a disadvantage in the low-dose region. Further research is needed to determine the superiority between hypo- and hyperfractionation.
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.