ArticleCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
Delineation of the "Oropharyngeal Mucosa" and Limiting its Dose in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Spares the Oropharynx Without Compromising Target Coverage.
Article in Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiotherapy-Induced Side Effects: Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Prevention and Treatments.MedComm · 2026Review
- Efficacies of radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients treated with total mesorectal excision or other types of surgery: an updated meta-analysis.Oncology reviews · 2025Review
- Efficacies of different postoperative radiotherapy techniques in patients with N2 non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.American journal of translational research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRadiation-induced oropharyngeal injury is a dose-limiting toxicity in head and neck cancer patients. Delineation of the "oropharyngeal mucosa" and limiting its dose to spare the oropharynx was investigated.
methodsIn this retrospective study, computed tomography imaging from eight patients with previously untreated head and neck cancer was employed. An adaptive contouring brush within the planning software Monaco was used to create an air cavity within the oropharynx, and then the air cavity was expanded uniformly 2 mm to create the "oropharyngeal mucosa". Three plans were independently generated for each patient: Plan1: dose constraint was applied for the oropharynx; Plan2: dose constraints were applied for the oropharynx and the "oropharyngeal mucosa"; Plan3: dose constraint was applied for the "oropharyngeal mucosa".
resultsAll plans had adequate target coverage and there were no statistical differences among plans. The mean dose, D30%, D45%, D50%, D85%, D90%, D95%, D100%, V25 Gy, V30 Gy, V35 Gy, V40 Gy, and V45 Gy of the oropharynx and "oropharyngeal mucosa" in Plan1 were significantly higher than those in Plan2 and Plan3. There were no significant differences between Plan2 and Plan3. There were no significant differences in the dosimetric parameters of any other organs at risk.
conclusionDelineation of the "oropharyngeal mucosa" and limiting its dose should be an easy and effective method to spare the oropharynx.
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.