ArticleJournal of medical physics
Comparative Dosimetric Evaluation of Tomotherapy with a 1-cm Field Width versus Volumetric-modulated Arc Therapy for Whole-brain Radiotherapy with Hippocampal Avoidance.
Article in Journal of medical physics. 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
Background: Hippocampal-avoidance whole-brain radiotherapy (HA-WBRT) reduces radiation dose to the hippocampal neural stem-cell niche, helping preserve neurocognitive function in patients with brain metastases. Objective: The objective of this study is to compare tomotherapy using a 1-cm field width with four-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for HA-WBRT. Materials and Methods: Twenty patients prescribed 30 Gy in 10 fractions were planned on both platforms. Hippocampi were contoured on T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging according to the RTOG 0933 atlas. Tomotherapy plans used a 1-cm jaw, pitch 0.500, and modulation factor 1.5-2.0, while VMAT plans used 6 MV photons with one coplanar and three noncoplanar arcs. Plan quality, hippocampal and organ-at-risk (OAR) doses, treatment efficiency, and deliverability (3%/3 mm gamma analysis) were compared. Results: Planning target volume coverage was comparable (V95%: 96.67% ± 0.57% vs. 96.53% ± 0.73%; Conclusion: Tomotherapy with a 1-cm field width provides superior hippocampal sparing, plan quality, and OAR protection while maintaining equivalent target coverage. VMAT achieves substantially faster treatment delivery with fewer MU, offering an alternative when shorter treatment times are preferred.
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.