ArticleCureus2026
Cervical Cancer Brachytherapy Dose Escalation Protocol: Analysis of Early Data Treatments According to EMBRACE II Protocol.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer is one of the most prevalent malignancies among women, particularly in developing countries. The combination of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy (BT) is the preferred treatment modality for patients with advanced-stage disease. High-dose rate brachytherapy (HDR BT) plays a crucial role in the overall treatment by delivering high radiation doses to the target volume while minimizing exposure to surrounding healthy tissues. PURPOSE: The statistical analysis focuses on the correlation of dosimetric parameters with dose constraints and the incremental dose increase per BT session. Additionally, it compares the total dose received by each patient from EBRT and BT in the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) and organs at risk (OARs) with the dose constraints of the modern EMBRACE II (European study on MRI-guided BRAchytherapy in locally advanced CErvical cancer) protocol. This study aims to highlight the significance of BT in cervical cancer treatment and provide insights to enhance treatment efficacy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed the treatment data of 34 patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Each patient initially received EBRT, followed by three HDR BT sessions, with the dose per session initially set at 7 Gy and later increased to 8 Gy. Data for this study were collected using a treatment planning system (TPS) software. For each patient, the dose received by 90% of the HR-CTV (D90) and the dose received by the 2 cc volume of each OAR (D2cc) were recorded and converted to an equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) using α/β=10 Gy for the tumor and α/β=3 for each OAR.
resultsThe mean D90 for HR-CTV increased significantly with the transition from 7 Gy to 8 Gy per fraction, resulting in improved target coverage. A total of seven out of 34 treatment plans achieved the recommended-acceptable total dose limit (EBRT + BT) ≥ 85 Gy EQD2 for HR-CTV, and 13 out of 34 treatment plans achieved a total dose between 80 and 85 Gy. For all 34 treatment plans, the OARs complied with the EMBRACE II dose constraints: D2cc < 90 Gy for the bladder, < 75 Gy for the rectum, and < 70 Gy for the sigmoid.
conclusionThe dosimetric results indicate that CT-based BT (IBBT) planning can achieve adequate tumor coverage while maintaining OAR doses within the acceptable limits of the EMBRACE II protocol. These findings support the ongoing optimization of individualized treatment planning and highlight the importance of having commonly defined limits that are regularly updated.
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.