ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
A Dosimetric Comparison of HyperArc Therapy Planning and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Planning in Treating Patients With Glioblastoma Multiforme.
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Radiotherapy for glioma in the AI era: current applications and future prospects.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimThis study aimed at evaluating the potential benefit of automatic non-coplanar volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) (hyperarc, HA) technique in treating glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). PATIENTS AND
methodsTwenty-seven patients with GBM who received coplanar VMAT (C-VMAT) were selected in this study. HA and non-coplanar VMAT (NC-VMAT) plans were generated with the same prescriptions and constraints. The Target coverage, organs at risk (OARs) dose, and dosimetric indexes were compared among three plans.
resultsThe HA plan demonstrated a reduction in dose to normal tissues while maintaining target coverage, compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. Additionally, HA plans demonstrated higher coverage of the GTV and PTV
conclusionThe HA plan had better dosimetric results compared to C-VMAT and NC-VMAT. The HA with automatic planning module and auto-delivery treatment also provided high-quality planning and delivery efficacy. These advantages suggest that HA could potentially escalate tumor doses while minimizing toxicity, thereby improving outcomes in GBM patients.
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.