ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2024
Evaluation of helical tomotherapy as an alternative for left-sided breast cancer patients not compliant with deep inspiration breath hold.
Article in Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study is to investigate, from a dosimetric perspective, whether helical Tomotherapy (HT) during free breathing (FB) can serve as an alternative technique for treating left-sided breast cancer patients who are unable to comply with the deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH) technique. Material and Methods: For this purpose, the CT images of 20 left breast-only cancer patients acquired in both FB and DIBH phases were utilized. The left breast was contoured as the target volume, while the heart, LAD, ipsilateral and contralateral lungs, and contralateral breast were contoured as organs at risk on the CT images obtained in both DIBH and FB. Planning with the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique was performed on the CT scans obtained in the DIBH (VMAT-DIBH), while planning with the HT technique was carried out on the CT scans obtained in the FB (HT-FB). Subsequently, dosimetric comparison of the plans were done in terms of target coverage and preservation of normal tissues. Results: Both techniques achieved the desired target coverage; however, in terms of D2, Vpres values, Conformity Number (CN), and Homogeneity Index (HI), the HT-FB technique was found to be superior. While the mean doses to the heart were similar for both techniques, doses to the LAD and left lung were found to be superior in plans generated with the HT-FB technique. When compared in terms of contralateral breast and right lung protection, VMAT-DIBH technique was found to be significantly superior. Conclusion: The treatment of left breast-only patients with the HT-FB technique has been observed to provide similar heart protection and better LAD and ipsilateral lung protection compared to the VMAT-DIBH technique without compromising target coverage. However, when the HT-FB technique is used, doses to the contralateral lung and contralateral breast should be carefully evaluated.
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.