ArticleCureus2025
Assessment and Comparison of 3D Conformal Radiotherapy With Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Preserving Remaining Brain Volume in High-Grade Gliomas.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Tri-modality therapy, consisting of maximal safe resection, concurrent chemo-radiation, and adjuvant chemotherapy, is the standard approach for the treatment of high-grade glioma (HGGs). Intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) have excellent potential to reduce the doses to organs at risk (OARs) with optimal dose conformity. However, the literature on the dosimetric parameters for remaining brain volume (RBV) and its relative comparison is limited. Methods We conducted a retrospective study for which the inclusion criteria were being over the age of 18 years and having a histologically proven post-operative HGG with a Karnofsky performance score (KPS) >60. The prescription dose was similar in both techniques (60 Gray in 30 fractions at 2 Gray per fraction). The primary objective was to evaluate and compare the dosimetric profiles of V5, V10, V20, V30, V40, V50, and V60 of the RBV. The secondary objective was to document and compare the doses received by OARs in three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and VMAT. Results The planning data of 24 patients were analyzed. The demographic profile was age (<40, 42%; > 40, 58%), male (58%) and female (42%), KPS (60, 12%; 70, 54%; 80, 33%), histopathological grade III (30%) and IV (70%), and tumor location (frontal 50%, parietal 21%, temporal 17%, and occipital 12%). In 79% of the patients, the tumor crossed midline. The VMAT plan showed superior dose conformity compared with the 3D-CRT plan (p-value 0.001). The low-to-medium dose volumes (V5, V10, V20, and V30) of the RBV were found to be statistically significant, thus favoring the 3D-CRT plan, but the medium-to-high dose volumes (V50 and V60), which were high in the 3D-CRT plan, favored the VMAT plan. However, the whole brain mean dose did not show any significant difference. Conclusion The VMAT plan showed superior dose conformity compared with the 3D-CRT plan. However, the RBV among the patients receiving the low doses was greater in the VMAT plan than in the 3D-CRT plan, while the RBV among those receiving high doses was significantly greater in the 3D-CRT plan.
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.