Are 5-Year Randomized Clinical Trial Results Sufficient for Implementation of Short-Course Whole Breast Radiation Therapy?

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.

1. Radiation Therapy Personalization in Cancer Treatment: Strategies and Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
   Review
2. Prospective Comparison of Hypofractionated Versus Normofractionated Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer: Late Toxicity Results of the Non-Inferiority KOSIMA Trial (ARO2010-3).Frontiers in oncology · 2022
   Article
3. Adoption of Ultrahypofractionated Radiation Therapy in Patients With Breast Cancer.Advances in radiation oncology
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  In Regard to Gillespie et al.

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as