ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2024
Development and validation of an automated Tomotherapy planning method for cervical cancer.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A meta-analysis of dose-volume parameters and treatment efficiency comparing O-ring and C-arm accelerator systems for craniospinal irradiations.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- A volume-controlled, anatomy-driven autoplanning strategy for whole-pelvic volumetric modulated arc therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Prior knowledge of anatomical relationships supports automatic delineation of clinical target volume for cervical cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to develop an automated Tomotherapy (TOMO) planning method for cervical cancer treatment, and to validate its feasibility and effectiveness. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study enrolled 30 cervical cancer patients treated with TOMO at our center. Utilizing scripting and Python environment within the RayStation (RaySearch Labs, Sweden) treatment planning system (TPS), we developed automated planning methods for TOMO and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques. The clinical manual TOMO (M-TOMO) plans for the 30 patients were re-optimized using automated planning scripts for both TOMO and VMAT, creating automated TOMO (A-TOMO) and automated VMAT (A-VMAT) plans. We compared A-TOMO with M-TOMO and A-VMAT plans. The primary evaluated relevant dosimetric parameters and treatment plan efficiency were assessed using the two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test for statistical analysis, with a P-value < 0.05 indicating statistical significance.
resultsA-TOMO plans maintained similar target dose uniformity compared to M-TOMO plans, with improvements in target conformity and faster dose drop-off outside the target, and demonstrated significant statistical differences (P
conclusionWe have successfully developed an A-TOMO planning method for cervical cancer. Compared to M-TOMO plans, A-TOMO plans improved target conformity and reduced radiation dose to OARs. Additionally, the quality of A-TOMO plans was on par with or surpasses that of A-VMAT plans. The A-TOMO planning method significantly improved the efficiency of treatment planning.
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.