ArticleInternational journal of women's health2025
Dosimetric Evaluation of Tangential Arc and Jaw Tracking Techniques in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2025. 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.
- Impact of Isocenter Configuration and Flattening Filter Free Delivery on VMAT Planning for Synchronous Bilateral Breast Cancer.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study presents a dosimetric comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans that employ static jaw, tangential arc, and jaw tracking techniques for patients with synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC). Methods: VMAT plans employing static jaw (S-VMAT), tangential arc (T-VMAT), and jaw tracking (J-VMAT) techniques were generated for twelve SBBC patients, receiving a prescribed dose of 50 Gy in 25 fractions. All treatment plans had their dosimetric and delivery parameters meticulously recorded and analyzed for comparison. Dosimetric verification was conducted using gamma analysis with 3%/3 mm criteria, based on ArcCHECK phantom measurements. Results: PTV coverage was comparable among all three techniques, with no statistically significant differences in dose indices, CI, or HI (p > 0.05). In contrast, T-VMAT and J-VMAT showed significant advantages in OARs protection compared to S-VMAT. T-VMAT achieved the lowest lung and heart doses, with the heart D Conclusion: T-VMAT and J-VMAT offer superior OAR sparing and efficient treatment delivery compared to S-VMAT. T-VMAT is particularly advantageous in reducing dose and treatment time, while J-VMAT provides a balanced approach between dosimetric quality and delivery accuracy. Both techniques represent promising strategies for optimizing VMAT planning in SBBC.
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.