Reply to the comment of S. VanDyk and K. Narayan on the editorial “IMRT, IGRT and other high technology become standard in external beam radiotherapy: But is image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer too expensive?” J Med Phys 2015;40:1-4

Sir, To begin with, the core point of the editorial (even the title) is about the general issue of the treatment of cervix cancer patients, where the main priority is to establish simple methods, while for other disease sites, the state of the art is constantly improving, especially with external beam methods. The short paragraph that was dedicated to the ultrasound (US) is well deserving, considering that the editorial is not about the US alone, but about the various other issues associated with the image‐based brachytherapy (IGABT) of cervical cancer.