ArticleReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology
Hypofractionation with concomitant boost using intensity-modulated radiation therapy in early-stage breast cancer in Mexico.
Article in Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of simultaneous integrated tumor bed boost and sequential boost during hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Acute skin toxicity of ultra-hypofractionated whole breast radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost for early breast cancer.Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2023Article
- Dosimetric Comparison of Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy, Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy and Hybrid Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy/Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy Techniques for Right Breast Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate whether hypofractionation with integrated boost to the tumour bed using intensity-modulated radiation therapy is an acceptable option and to determine whether this treatment compromises local control, toxicity and cosmesis.
backgroundRetrospective studies have demonstrated that patients who are treated with HF and integrated boost experience adequate local control, a dosimetric benefit, decreased toxicity and acceptable cosmesis compared with conventional fractionation. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective, observational and longitudinal study was conducted from January 2008 to June 2015 and included 34 patients with breast cancer (stage 0-II) who were undergoing conservative surgery.The prescribed doses were 45 Gy in 20 fractions (2.25 Gy/fraction) to the breast and 56 Gy in 20 fractions (2.8 Gy/fraction) to the tumour bed.
resultsThirty-four patients were included. The mean follow-up was 49.29 months, and the mean age was 52 years. The mean percentage of PTV from the mammary region that received 100% of the prescribed dose was 97.89% (range 95-100), and the mean PTV percentage of the tumour bed that received 100% of the dose was 98% (95-100).The local control and the overall survival were 100%, and the cosmesis was good in 82% of the patients. Grade 1 acute toxicity was present in 16 patients (47%), and grade 1 chronic toxicity occurred in 6 cases (18%).
conclusionThe results of the present study demonstrate that hypofractionation with integrated boost using intensity-modulated radiation therapy is an acceptable option that provides excellent local control and low toxicity.
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.