ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment
Dosimetric Comparison of Particle Radiotherapy and Photon VMAT for Left-Sided Breast Cancer Post Breast-Conserving Surgery.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
IntroductionCarbon ion radiotherapy shows potential for left-sided breast cancer, yet comparative dosimetric data remains limited. This study retrospectively compared the dosimetric characteristics of proton and carbon ion radiotherapies with conformal radiation therapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for left-sided breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery, exploring heavy ion radiotherapy's potential as promising treatment.Materials and MethodsEighteen patients staged I/II were enrolled. Treatment plans were created using three treatment planning systems: Oncentra® for photon beams, RayStation® for proton, and CiPlan® for carbon ion. The primary objective was to deliver 100% of prescribed dose to 95% of the PTV and PTVtb volumes. Dosimetric parameters for the target and organs at risk (OARs), including conformity indices (CI) and homogeneity indices (HI), were compared using the Friedman M-test.ResultsAll treatment methods met the target coverage planning objective and the prescribed dose, without any statistically significant differences. Carbon ion therapy (CI: 0.69±0) exhibited improved conformality compared with IMRT (CI: 0.43±0.01, P < 0.01) and CRT (CI: 0.3±0.01, P < 0.01), without significant advantage over VMAT. The carbon ion method (HI: 1.08±0.00) didn't exhibit any significant improvement in homogeneity compared with other treatments. Carbon ion therapy generally reduced the Dmean or V5 of OARs, particularly providing superior protection than VMAT for organs including contralateral breast (Dmean: 0.19±0.06 Gy (RBE)), heart (Dmean: 1.23±0.35 Gy (RBE), V5: 3.92±4.55 %), and contralateral lung (V5: 0.01±0.00 %). The carbon method also demonstrated significant dosimetric superiority over proton in V
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.