ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Spatially fractionated radiation therapy for treating recurrent glioblastoma: a dosimetric feasibility study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
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
Objective: Spatially fractionated radiation therapy (SFRT) shows promise for treating bulky, advanced, or recurrent tumors. To evaluate the feasibility of SFRT for patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM), we conducted a planning study involving 14 patients, analyzing vertex target volume (VTV) contours and cumulative doses to both targets and organs at risk (OARs). Method: The patients were divided into two groups based on gross tumor volume (GTV): 10 patients with GTV > 15 cc; 4 patients with GTV ≤ 15 cc. SFRT was planned as an upfront boost, using LATTICE radiotherapy (LRT) and stereotactic central ablative radiation therapy (SCART) respectively. With a LRT technique, vertex diameters ranged from 0.8-1.5 cm, with center-to-center spacing of 2-4 cm. Result: GTV geometry-not size-determined mean vertex diameter (MVD: 0.99 ± 0.12 cm), spacing (2.93 ± 0.34 cm), and the VTV-to-GTV ratio (VGR: 6.6 ± 1.7%). With a SCART technique, the mean VGR was 25.8 ± 10.0%. Compared with the original sum plan, the cumulative EQD2 Conclusion: In summary, our planning study demonstrates that dosimetrically acceptable SFRT plans can be achieved for recurrent GBM. The main clinical consideration is balancing the potential benefit of SFRT against the risk of radiation-induced necrosis.
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.