ArticleBreast cancer (Dove Medical Press)2024
Dosimetric Study and Robustness Analysis of Base Note Intensive Locked Field Radiotherapy for Left Breast Cancer.
Article in Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press), 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The locked vision plan can make the left breast cancer heart and lung organs dose. Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the dosimetric differences between field-locked and field-split plans in intensity-modulated radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer, to explore the effect of field-locking on the low-dose region, and to evaluate its robustness to the radiotherapy target, in order to provide a reference for the selection of clinical radiotherapy protocols. Methods: A total of 30 patients were selected after radical left breast cancer surgery, and 7-field locked-field and split-field plans were developed to compare the dose difference (∆D) between the target area and each organ at risk, and to introduce offsets of 3, 5 and 7 mm in six directions and recalculate the perturbed dose distributions, and to compare the ∆D between the original and the perturbed plans according to the robustness of the plans. Results: The results revealed that the D Discussion: It was concluded that the field-locking plan could reduce the low-dose area of the affected lung and provide improved protection to the remaining critical organs, and the field-locking plan was more robust in protecting critical organs. Meanwhile, the field-locking plan showed higher sensitivity to positional deviation for target PTV.
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.