Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39636483›Full record

ArticleRadiological physics and technology2025

Optimizing the planning process in computed tomography-based image-guided adaptive brachytherapy for cervical cancer using a spreadsheet-based daily dose management system.

Jun Takatsu, Takahito Chiba, Naoya Murakami, Kotaro Iijima, Tatsuya Inoue, Noriyuki Okonogi, Yoichi Muramoto, Terufumi Kawamoto, Tatsuki Karino, Hiroyuki Okamoto and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Jun Takatsu *Department of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Takahito Chiba *Radiation Safety and Quality Assurance Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Naoya MurakamiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan. n.murakami.zi@juntendo.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0660-9987
Kotaro IijimaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Tatsuya InoueDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Noriyuki OkonogiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Yoichi MuramotoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Terufumi KawamotoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Tatsuki KarinoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Hiroyuki OkamotoRadiation Safety and Quality Assurance Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Satoshi NakamuraRadiation Safety and Quality Assurance Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Hiroki NakayamaRadiation Safety and Quality Assurance Division, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0045, Japan.
Yasuhisa TeraoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Juntendo University, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.
Naoto ShikamaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8421, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science London 19K17160
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study developed a system to reduce the treatment planning time for cervical cancer brachytherapy. An in-house Excel spreadsheet was developed to streamline dosimetric evaluation by combining external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy doses, while also displaying daily dose constraints, a novel feature of the system. This system was validated in 46 consecutive patients who underwent intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy using several applicators and required more complex dose calculation procedures than intracavitary brachytherapy alone. The proposed system included contouring and catheter reconstruction using multiple treatment planning systems simultaneously and was integrated with Excel spreadsheets for rapid dosimetric evaluation. The median time required for treatment planning was 36 min (range: 12-72 min), which was a much shorter time than those reported previously. This optimized system demonstrated the potential to increase the efficiency of brachytherapy planning to meet prescribed dose constraints without compromising treatment quality.

Indexed as

BrachytherapyRadiation DosageRadiotherapy, Image-GuidedRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray ComputedUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRadiotherapy DosageBrachytherapyCervical cancerIGABTTreatment planningWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID39636483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.