2014
DOI: 10.3109/0284186x.2014.933874
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dose-volume response in acute dysphagia toxicity: Validating QUANTEC recommendations into clinical practice for head and neck radiotherapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, our dosimetric data showed IMPT plans were able to achieve significantly lower mean doses to several OARs, including the bilateral cochlea, the esophagus, the larynx, the mandible, the oral cavity, and the tongue. This is of high clinical interest because lower doses to these OARs could result in lower incidence of hearing loss, dysphagia, osteonecrosis, mucositis, and dysgeusia …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, our dosimetric data showed IMPT plans were able to achieve significantly lower mean doses to several OARs, including the bilateral cochlea, the esophagus, the larynx, the mandible, the oral cavity, and the tongue. This is of high clinical interest because lower doses to these OARs could result in lower incidence of hearing loss, dysphagia, osteonecrosis, mucositis, and dysgeusia …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Within the group of nine included studies, there were distinct differences in the scope of the papers and as such, two subgroups were identified: (1) studies (n = 5) that aimed purely to assess clinical and functional results following active utilization of swallow structure sparing IMRT and (2) studies (n = 4) that sought to clinically validate NTCP models of dysphagia using patient cohort data that had received some degree of active sparing (which were all from the same Danish group) . As the second group of studies had a different overall purpose in their study design, only the information relevant to the active sparing processes used with their patient cohorts was reviewed for this paper.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two studies explored outcomes in oropharynx cohorts only while six papers included patients with tumors in the oropharynx, hypopharynx, and/or or nasopharynx (Table ) . One paper did not report on specific sites of disease, stating that recruitment was open to any patient with a squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the head and neck. All patients in the included studies were treated with IMRT, with concurrent chemotherapy regimens used in six studies .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations