Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33797199›Full record

Trial reportCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2021

Outcome of hypofractionated breast irradiation and intraoperative electron boost in early breast cancer: A randomized non-inferiority clinical trial.

Pedram Fadavi, Nahid Nafissi, Seied Rabi Mahdavi, Bahareh Jafarnejadi, Seyed Alireza Javadinia

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Breast Cancer Screening Strategies in Limited-Resource Countries.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 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 1 country.

Pedram FadaviDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nahid NafissiDepartment of General Surgery, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Seied Rabi MahdaviDepartment of Medical Physics, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Bahareh JafarnejadiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-8643-4541
Seyed Alireza JavadiniaCellular and Molecular Research Center, Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, Sabzevar, Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-2467-837X
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRSabzevar University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

Iran University of Medical Sciences 2859
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) followed by hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) provides the shortest possible time of adjuvant breast irradiation. The efficacy of either method has been described in previous reports; however, to our knowledge, the efficacy of combined therapy has not been reported.

aimTo compare the toxicity and cosmetic outcome of IOERT as a tumor bed boost followed by HWBI with conventional whole breast irradiation (CWBI) followed by external electron tumor bed boost (EETBB) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) in patients with invasive breast cancer.

methodsIn 2019, a prospective noninferiority trial (IRCT20180919041070N2) was started. After BCS, early-stage breast cancer patients were treated by IOERT (10 Gy) and HWBI (42.56 Gy in 16 fractions) or CWBI (50 Gy in 25 fraction) and EETBB (10 Gy in 5) in a double-arm design. Acute/late toxicity and cosmetic outcome were evaluated by common toxicity criteria (CTC) after 1-year follow-up (FUP) at the level of p < .05.

resultsOf 60 eligible patients, 30 were allocated to each group. Regarding acute effects after a median FUP of 12 months, CTC-score of grade II-III erythema (p = .001) and desquamation (p = .005) were significantly higher in CWBI+EETBB compared to IOERT+ HWBI. However, there were no significant differences at the end of radiotherapy and after 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year. Cosmetic outcome after radiation was similar in both groups mostly rating as good/excellent after 1-year FUP.

conclusionsBoost-IOERT/HWBI regimen has comparable acute and late treatment toxicity profiles compared to the CWBI.

Indexed as

Radiation Dose HypofractionationBreast NeoplasmsElectronsEquivalence Trials as TopicFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesRadiotherapy, AdjuvantSurvival Rateboostcosmetic outcomeelectronshypofractionationintraoperative radiotherapytoxicity

Identifiers

PMID33797199
PMCPMC8552001
OpenAlexW3147418819

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.