Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26093369›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiation research2015

Final results from a multicenter prospective study ( JROSG 05-5) on postoperative radiotherapy for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ with an involved surgical margin or close margin widths of 1 mm or less.

Naoto Shikama, Kenji Sekiguchi, Naoki Nakamura, Hiroshi Sekine, Yuko Nakayama, Kazufumi Imanaka, Takeshi Akiba, Masahiko Aoki, Yoshiomi Hatayama, Etsuyo Ogo and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of radiation research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Naoto ShikamaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Saitama Medical University, International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka-City, Saitama, 350-1298 Japan nshikama0525@gmail.com.
Kenji SekiguchiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, St Luke's International Hospital, 9-1 Akashi-cho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-8560, Japan.
Naoki NakamuraDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Center East, 6-5-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa-shi, Chiba, 277-8577, Japan.
Hiroshi SekineDepartment of Radiology, The Jikei University Third Hospital, 4-11-1 Izumihonmachi, Komae-shi, Tokyo, 201-8601, Japan.
Yuko NakayamaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kanagawa Cancer Center, 2-3-2 Nakao, Asahi-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa, 241-8515, Japan.
Kazufumi ImanakaDepartment of Radiology, Nishikobe Medical Center, 5-7-1 Kojidai, Nishi-ku, Kobe, Shogo, 651-2273, Japan.
Takeshi AkibaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Tokai University, 143 Shimokasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan.
Masahiko AokiDepartment of Radiology, Hirosaki University School of Medicine and Hospital, 53 Honmachi, Hirosaki, Aomori, 036-8563, Japan.
Yoshiomi HatayamaDepartment of Radiology, Hirosaki University School of Medicine and Hospital, 53 Honmachi, Hirosaki, Aomori, 036-8563, Japan.
Etsuyo OgoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Kurume University Hospital, 67 Asahimachi, Kurume-shi, Fukuoka, 830-0011, Japan.
Yoshikazu KagamiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Showa University Hospital, 1-5-8 Hatanodai, Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 142-8666, Japan.
Miho KawashimaDepartment of Radiology, Dokkyo Medical University, Koshigaya Hospital, 2-1-50 Mimamikoshigaya, Koshigaya-shi, Saitama, 343-8555, Japan.
Kumiko KarasawaResearch Center for Charged Particle Therapy, National Institute of Radiological Sciences, 4-9-1 Anagawa, Inage-ku, Chiba-shi, Chiba, 263-8555, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This multicenter prospective study ( Japanese Radiation Oncology Study Group: JROSG 05-5) aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with an involved surgical margin or close margin widths of ≤1 mm or less. PORT consisted of whole-breast irradiation (50 Gy in 25 fractions) followed by boost irradiation (10 Gy in 5 fractions). Eligibility criteria were as follows: (i) DCIS without an invasive carcinoma component, (ii) age between 20 and 80 years old, (iii) involved margin or close margin widths of ≤1 mm, (iv) refusal of re-resection, (v) performance status of 0-2, and (vi) written informed consent. The primary endpoint was ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), recurrence patterns, and adverse events. A total of 37 patients from 12 institutions were enrolled from January 2007 to May 2009. The median follow-up time was 62 months (range, 28-85 months). The median pathological tumor size was 2.5 cm (range, 0.3-8.5 cm). Of the 37 patients, 21 had involved margins, and 16 had close margins. The 5-year IBTR, OS and RFS rates were 6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2-21), 97% (95% CI: 83-99) and 91% (95% CI: 77-97), respectively. Two patients developed local recurrence at the original site after 39 and 58 months. No severe adverse events were found. Our study suggests that this PORT regimen could be a treatment option for patients with DCIS with involved margin or close margin who don't desire re-resection.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingCombined Modality TherapyDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansMargins of ExcisionMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPostoperative PeriodProspective StudiesRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedTomography, X-Ray Computedbreast cancerbreast conservationductal carcinoma in situmargin widthradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID26093369
PMCPMC4577003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.