FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2014036538> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2014036538 endingPage "S439" @default.
• W2014036538 startingPage "S439" @default.
• W2014036538 abstract "To prospectively compare Volumetric Intensity-Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and conventional intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in coverage of planning target volumes and avoidance of multiple OARs (organs at risk) in patients undergoing definitive chemoradiotherapy for advanced (stage III or IV) squamous cell cancer of the head and neck. Computed tomography scans of 20 consecutive patients with advanced tumors of the larynx, naso-, oro- and hypopharynx were prospectively planned using IMRT (7 field) and VMAT using two arcs. Calculated doses to planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR) were compared between IMRT and VMAT plans. Dose-volume histograms (DVH) were utilized to obtain calculated doses to planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR), including parotids, cochlea, spinal cord, brainstem, anterior tongue, pituitary and brachial plexus, and were compared between IMRT and VMAT plans. In addition the plans were compared for dose conformity and homogeneity. The final treatment plan was chosen by the radiation oncologist. VMAT was chosen as the ultimate plan in 18 of 20 patients (90%) because the plans were thought to be otherwise clinically equivalent. The IMRT plan was chosen in 2 of 20 patients because the VMAT plan produced concentric irradiation of the cord, which was not overcome even with an avoidance structure. For all patients, VMAT plans had a lower number of average monitor units on average (MU = 548.75) than IMRT plans (MU = 1511.53) (p < 0.0001). Using the conformity index (CI), defined as the 95% isodose volume divided by the PTV, the IMRT plan was more conformal with a lower conformity index (CI = 1.71) than the VMAT plan (CI = 2.11) (p = 0.027). Dose homogeneity, as measured by average standard deviation of dose distribution over the PTV, was not different with VMAT (1.43 Gy) or IMRT (1.71 Gy) (p = 0.105). There were no differences in sparing organs at risk. In this prospective study, VMAT plans were chosen over IMRT 90% of the time. Compared to IMRT, VMAT plans used only one third of the MUs, had shorter treatment times, similar dose homogeneity, and similar sparing of OAR. IMRT did provide superior dose conformity. This difference in conformity was not clinically significant." @default.
• W2014036538 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2014036538 creator A5009371342 @default.
• W2014036538 creator A5052819423 @default.
• W2014036538 creator A5073719453 @default.
• W2014036538 creator A5088677739 @default.
• W2014036538 date "2010-11-01" @default.
• W2014036538 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2014036538 title "Volumetric Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy vs. Conventional IMRT in Advanced Head and Neck Cancer: A Prospective, Comparative Dosimetric Study using Multiple Organs at Risk" @default.
• W2014036538 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.07.1032" @default.
• W2014036538 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2014036538 type Work @default.
• W2014036538 sameAs 2014036538 @default.
• W2014036538 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2014036538 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2014036538 hasAuthorship W2014036538A5009371342 @default.
• W2014036538 hasAuthorship W2014036538A5052819423 @default.
• W2014036538 hasAuthorship W2014036538A5073719453 @default.
• W2014036538 hasAuthorship W2014036538A5088677739 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C199639397 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C201645570 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C2776530083 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C2779104521 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C2780474809 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C2780920918 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C126838900 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C127413603 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C141071460 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C199639397 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C201645570 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C2776530083 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C2779104521 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C2780474809 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C2780920918 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C2989005 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C509974204 @default.
• W2014036538 hasConceptScore W2014036538C71924100 @default.
• W2014036538 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2014036538 hasLocation W20140365381 @default.
• W2014036538 hasOpenAccess W2014036538 @default.
• W2014036538 hasPrimaryLocation W20140365381 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W1423219471 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W169353680 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2050522255 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2057960324 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2060435002 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2130332406 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2320664076 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2890419311 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2910562397 @default.
• W2014036538 hasRelatedWork W2911783452 @default.
• W2014036538 hasVolume "78" @default.
• W2014036538 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2014036538 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2014036538 magId "2014036538" @default.
• W2014036538 workType "article" @default.