ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Radiotherapy of Breast Cancer in Laterally Tilted Prone vs. Supine Position: What about the Internal Mammary Chain?
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the multimodal breast-conserving curative therapy of some high-risk breast cancer patients, extended external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) not only to the breast but also to the supraclavicular fossa and the internal mammary chain (parasternal region (PSR)) is indicated. We report a dosimetric study on the EBRT of the breast ("B") and the breast including PSR ("B + PSR"), comparing the supine and the laterally tilted prone patient positions in free breathing.
methodsThe planning CT scans of 20 left- and 20 right-sided patients were analyzed. EBRT plans were calculated with 3D conformal EBRT (3D) and with intensity-modulated EBRT (IMRT) for "B" and "B + PSR" in the prone and supine positions. The mean and threshold doses were computed. The quality of EBRT plans was compared with an overall plan assessment factor (OPAF), comprising three subfactors, homogeneity, conformity, and radiogenic exposure of OAR.
resultsIn the EBRT of "B", prone positioning significantly reduced the exposure of the OARs "heart" and "ipsilateral lung" and "lymphatic regions". The OPAF was significantly better in the prone position, regardless of the planning technique or the treated breast side. In the EBRT of "B + PSR", supine positioning significantly reduced the OAR "heart" exposure but increased the dose to the OARs "ipsilateral lung" and "lymphatic regions". There were no significant differences for the OPAF, independent of the irradiated breast side. Only the IMRT planning technique increased the chance of a comparatively good EBRT plan.
conclusionFree breathing prone positioning significantly improves plan quality in the EBRT of the breast but not in the EBRT of the breast + PSR.
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.