ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2022
Dosimetric evaluation of photons versus protons in postmastectomy planning for ultrahypofractionated breast radiotherapy.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acute skin toxicity and cosmesis outcome in non-metastatic breast cancer patients treated with ultrahypofractionated radiotherapy: a randomized controlled phase II clinical trial comparing proton versus photon radiotherapy.Journal of radiation research · 2026Trial
- Dosimetric comparison of organs at risk in ultra-hypofractionated versus hypofractionated postoperative radiotherapy for early breast cancer: single center clinical study.Radiology and oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Patient and staff perspective toward marker-less patient setup accuracy in breast radiotherapy.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Cardiac Substructure Dose Reduction and Toxicity Risk Assessment: IMPT Versus IMRT for Breast Cancer.International journal of particle therapy · 2025Article
- ACR-ARS Practice Parameter for the Performance of Proton Beam Therapy.International journal of particle therapy · 2024Article
- Dosimetric Correlation of Acute Radiation Dermatitis in Patients With Breast Cancer Undergoing Hypofractionated Proton Beam Therapy Using Pencil Beam Scanning.Journal of breast cancer · 2024Article
- Effectiveness of multi-criteria optimization in combination with knowledge-based modeling in radiotherapy of left-sided breast including regional nodes.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrahypofractionation can shorten the irradiation period. This study is the first dosimetric investigation comparing ultrahypofractionation using volumetric arc radiation therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated proton radiation therapy (IMPT) techniques in postmastectomy treatment planning. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwenty postmastectomy patients (10-left and 10-right sided) were replanned with both VMAT and IMPT techniques. There were four scenarios: left chest wall, left chest wall including regional nodes, right chest wall, and right chest wall including regional nodes. The prescribed dose was 26 Gy(RBE) in 5 fractions. For VMAT, a 1-cm bolus was added for 2 in 5 fractions. For IMPT, robust optimization was performed on the CTV structure with a 3-mm setup uncertainty and a 3.5% range uncertainty. This study aimed to compare the dosimetric parameters of the PTV, ipsilateral lung, contralateral lung, heart, skin, esophageal, and thyroid doses.
resultsThe PTV-D95 was kept above 24.7 Gy(RBE) in both VMAT and IMPT plans. The ipsilateral lung mean dose of the IMPT plans was comparable to that of the VMAT plans. In three of four scenarios, the V5 of the ipsilateral lung in IMPT plans was lower than in VMAT plans. The Dmean and V5 of heart dose were reduced by a factor of 4 in the IMPT plans of the left side. For the right side, the Dmean of the heart was less than 1 Gy(RBE) for IMPT, while the VMAT delivered approximately 3 Gy(RBE). The IMPT plans showed a significantly higher skin dose owing to the lack of a skin-sparing effect in the proton beam. The IMPT plans provided lower esophageal and thyroid mean dose.
conclusionDespite the higher skin dose with the proton plan, IMPT significantly reduced the dose to adjacent organs at risk, which might translate into the reduction of late toxicities when compared with the photon plan.
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.