ArticleTechnical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology2024
Comparison of predicted and actual dermatitis generated from computed tomography images and dose distribution maps.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anticipating the onset, location and severity of radiation dermatitis before radiotherapy can aid in dermatological care. This study developed a method for creation of a prediction diagram for dermatitis and conducted a comparative verification between the prediction diagram and actual patient condition. The prediction diagram involved converting skin doses into 2 Gy fractionated equivalent doses using α/β of 10.0, defining regions of interest (ROIs) from 20-50 Gy at 10 Gy intervals. Overlaps between these ROIs at each dose level and the skin (external) was sequentially color-coded as blue, yellow, red, and purple. The study included four patients: two underwent head and neck treatment and two received neck and chest treatment. This approach involved a visual assessment comparing the prediction diagram with skin photographs captured at the end of treatment. Nurses marked skin sites corresponding to grades 1 and 2 on photographs, assessing their correlation with the predicted range. Visual assessment results were largely positive, although one patient exhibited slightly lower scores. Results revealed a correlation between grade 1 skin reactions and the 20 Gy regions. Grade 2 reactions were observed in regions near 30 and 40 Gy. Although discrepancies between prediction diagram and actual skin symptoms were observed in patients, a broad agreement was evident. The prediction diagram cannot accurately predict radiation dermatitis, as it does not account for skin symptoms unrelated to the dose. However, the diagram is significant as it provides physicians, nurses, and patients with concise and visually comprehensible information regarding the location of dermatitis.
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.