ArticleRadiological physics and technology2026
Adaptive 3D-CRT with CCRT for head and neck cancer: resource limited single center experience in Bangladesh.
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anatomical changes during Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) radiotherapy can compromise target volume dose coverage and Organs at Risk (OARs) sparing. This study evaluated the volumetric, dosimetric, clinical, and cost-effectiveness impacts of Adaptive Radiotherapy (ART) in HNC patients treated with Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and Con-Current Chemo-Radiotherapy (CCRT) in resource-limited settings. Fifteen patients with advanced HNC were treated using 3D-CRT with CCRT to a total dose of 70 Gray (Gy) in 35 fractions. A repeat Computed Tomography (re-CT) simulation was performed at 44 Gy due to anatomical changes such as weight loss and tumor shrinkage during the treatment. Adaptive plans were generated using the re-CT images. Pre- and re-CT simulation images were fused, and Planning Target Volumes (PTVs) from the initial and adaptive plans were compared to evaluate the volumetric changes. Adaptive plans were then compared with the initial plans using Dose-Volume Histograms (DVHs), and dosimetric variations in Gross Tumor Volume (GTV), Clinical Target Volume (CTV), and PTV were evaluated. Target coverage deterioration observed with 3D-CRT was mitigated by ART, resulting in improved coverage for both high- and low-dose target volumes compared with the accumulated planned dose. The mean body weight ratio was 0.88 (12% weight loss), and the mean PTV volume ratio up to 44 Gy was 0.76 (24% reduction). Adaptive plans reduced the relative mean dose to the spinal cord 3.2%, brainstem 1.4%, ipsilateral parotid 4.10%, contralateral parotid 2.75%, esophagus 7.40%, mandible 3.60%, and oral cavity 5.60%, while dose coverage of GTV, CTV, and PTV improved by 3.50%, 3.06%, and 2.67%, respectively. ART combined with 3D-CRT and CCRT enhances target coverage while reducing doses to OARs. Re-CT-based adaptive planning at approximately 44 Gy appears to be a feasible and cost-effective strategy for maintaining dosimetric accuracy and adapting to volumetric changes in resource-limited settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42507086What 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.