ArticleBMC cancer2024
A dosimetric comparison of brachytherapy sources for endometrial cancer: an electronic brachytherapy and an iridium-192 source with multichannel cylinders and a three-dimensional technique.
Article in BMC 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.
- Adjuvant electronic brachytherapy for early-stage endometrial cancer: clinical outcomes, toxicity, and long-term local control.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Evaluation and Clinical Relevance of Plan Quality Indices in Intracavitary Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer.F1000Research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeIr192 vaginal brachytherapy (IBT) is commonly used for patients with postoperative endometrial cancer (EC). We devised a novel multichannel vaginal applicator that could be equipped with an electronic brachytherapy (EBT) device. We aimed to explore the differences in physical parameters between the EBT and IBT. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 20 EC patients who received adjuvant IBT from March 1, 2023, to May 1, 2023. Multichannel vaginal cylinders were used, and three-dimensional plans were generated. We designed an electronic multichannel vaginal applicator model and simulated a three-dimensional EBT plan. In order to ensure comparability, D90 of the CTV for the EBT plan was normalized to be equivalent to that of the IBT plan for the same patient.
resultsTwenty EBT plans were compared with 20 IBT plans. Results showed, the mean D90 value of clinical target volume (CTV) was 536.1 cGy for both treatment plans. For the mean dose of CTV, the EBT was significantly greater (738.3 vs. 684.3 cGy, p = 0.000). There was no significant difference in CTV coverage between the EBT and IBT plans. For high-dose areas (V200% and V150%), the EBTs were significantly greater. There were no significant differences in the maximum doses to the vaginal mucosa between the EBT and IBT, whether at the apex or in the middle segment. For the bladder and rectum, both the low-dose area and high-dose area were significantly lower in the EBT plans. For the conformity index, there was no significant difference between the EBT and IBT plans. For the dose homogeneity index, the EBT value was lower.
conclusionIn conclusion, under the premise of a three-dimensional brachytherapy plan, for patients receiving multichannel vaginal applicator brachytherapy, compared with IBT, EBT could reduce the dose to the surrounding organs at risk while maintaining the dose in the target area.
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.