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.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pregnancy, cancer, and radiation-a modern refresher.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2026Guideline
- Magnetic Resonance Guided Radiation Therapy for High-Grade Glioma in Pregnancy: Planning, Validation, and Adaptive Fetal Dose Monitoring.Advances in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Treatment of a Pregnant Patient With a Brain Tumor Using Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Therapy.Advances in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Out-of-field dose assessment for pencil beam scanning proton radiotherapy versus photon radiotherapy for breast cancer in pregnant women.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Fetal dose assessment in a pregnant patient with brain tumor: A comparative study of proton PBS and 3DCRT/VMAT radiation therapy techniques.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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.