Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32904392›Full record

ArticleReports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology

Hypo- vs. normofractionated radiation therapy in breast cancer: A patterns of care analysis in German speaking countries.

M Mayinger, C Straube, D Habermehl, M N Duma, S E Combs

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Sustainability in radiation oncology: opportunities for enhancing patient care and reducing COStrahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

M MayingerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
C StraubeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
D HabermehlDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
M N DumaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
S E CombsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.
TUM Klinikum · DEUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIM AND

backgroundTo assess the use of hypofractionated (HG-RT) versus normofractionated radiation therapy (NF-RT) in Breast Cancer in German speaking countries. MATERIALS AND

methodsBetween July 2017 and August 2017, an email-based survey was sent to all 1408 physicians that are members of the German Society of Radiation Oncology (DEGRO). The survey was completed by 180 physicians including 10 private practice owners and 52 heads of departments. The majority (82.1%) of the participants had >15 years of experience in radiation therapy (RT).

resultsThe majority (83.9%) of the heads of the departments agreed on using the normofractionated regimen of RT as standard treatment for breast cancer. Several physicians were skeptical about HF-RT with 6.5% of the heads refusing to use HF-RT. 40.3% of the departments had not seen the new German guidelines suggesting HF-RT as the standard treatment for all patients as positive or merely adopted a neutral position toward the guidelines (33.9%). The main points of criticism were increased side effects, an impaired toxicity profile and insufficient data. Most departments (46.8%) that perform HF-RT do so in an individual based manner.

conclusionsHF-RT remains controversial in German speaking countries. Our data shows that NF-RT remains the predominant method of treatment. HF-RT is only used in a defined group of patients as most German physicians agree that particular patients, especially those at higher risk of RT late effects, may benefit from a less intense, extended fractionation schedule.

Indexed as

Breast cancerDEGRO, German Society of Radiation OncologyGy, grayHF-RT, hypofractionated radiotherapyHypofractionated radiotherapyIORT, intraoperative radiation therapyNormofractionated radiotherapyPatterns of careRT, radiation therapySIB, simultaneous integrated boostSOP, standard operating procedure

Identifiers

PMID32904392
PMCPMC7453120
OpenAlexW3045759308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.