Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38887816›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024

Fetal dose assessment in a pregnant patient with brain tumor: A comparative study of proton PBS and 3DCRT/VMAT radiation therapy techniques.

Robabeh Rahimi, Michael Taylor, Xing Li, Kuan Ling Chen, Grayden MacLennan, Erin Murdoch, Lienard Chang, Ashkan Parniani, Peng Wang, Ashish Chawla and 2 more

Abstract readComparative StudyCase Reports
In one paragraph

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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Robabeh RahimiRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7651-5479
Michael TaylorRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Xing LiRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Kuan Ling ChenRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Grayden MacLennanRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Erin MurdochRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Lienard ChangRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Ashkan ParnianiRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Peng WangRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Ashish ChawlaRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Jiajin FanRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.
Daniel KimRadiation Oncology Department, Inova Health System, Fairfax, Virginia, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe treatment of brain tumors in pregnant patients poses challenges, as the out-of-field dose exposure to the fetus can potentially be harmful. A pregnant patient with prior radiation treatment was presented with a brain tumor at our clinic. This work reports on our pre-treatment study that compared fetal dose exposure between intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) using pencil beam scanning (PBS) and conventional photon 3D conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and the subsequent pregnant patient's radiation treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsPre-treatment measurements of clinical plans, 3DCRT, VMAT, and IMPT, were conducted on a phantom. Measurements were performed using a device capable of neutron detections, closely following AAPM guidelines, TG158. For photon measurements, fetus shielding was utilized. On patient treatment days, which was determined to be proton treatment, shielding was used only during daily imaging for patient setup. Additionally, an in vivo measurement was conducted on the patient.

resultsMeasurements showed that IMPT delivered the lowest fetal dose, considering both photon and neutron out-of-field doses to the fetus, even when shielding was implemented for photon measurements. Additionally, the proton plans demonstrated superior treatment for the mother, a reirradiation case.

conclusionThe patient was treated with proton therapy, and the baby was subsequently delivered at full term with no complications. This case study supports previous clinical findings and advocates for the expanded use of proton therapy in this patient population.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsFetusOrgans at RiskPhantoms, ImagingProton TherapyRadiotherapy, ConformalRadiotherapy DosageRadiotherapy, Intensity-ModulatedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedAdultFemaleHumansPregnancyPregnancy Complications, Neoplastic3D conformal radiation therapybrain tumorfetal doseneutron dosepencil beam scanningproton therapyre‐irradiationvolumetric‐modulated arc therapy

Identifiers

PMID38887816
PMCPMC11302808

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.