ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Efficacy, safety, and feasibility of volumetric modulated arc therapy for synchronous bilateral breast cancer management.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hypofractionated and conventionally fractionated radiotherapy for synchronous bilateral breast cancer: clinical and dosimetric outcomes.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Article
- Radiobiological evaluation of hypofractionated vs. conventional VMAT for synchronous bilateral breast cancer: a focus on regional nodal irradiation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Ethos intelligent optimization engine for left locally advanced breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Comparative Study of Plan Robustness for Breast Radiotherapy: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy Plans with Robust Optimization versus Manual Flash Approach.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) exhibits potent advantages regarding target volume coverage and protection of organs at risk, notably in the context of anatomical constraints. Nevertheless, reports concerning VMAT for the treatment of synchronous bilateral breast cancers (SBBC) have been scarce to date. As such, we conducted this observational study to assess efficacy, safety and feasibility of VMAT in SBBC. Materials and Methods: From August 2011 to December 2017, 54 consecutive patients with SBBC with or without axillary nodes involvement underwent a treatment protocol containing radiotherapy using VMAT. A total dose (TD) of 52.2Gy in 29 fractions was delivered to breast and internal mammary chain (IMC) nodes Planning Target Volume (PTV) plus, if applicable, a TD of 49.3Gy in 29 fractions to the supra- and infra-clavicular nodes PTV and a TD of 63.22Gy in 29 fractions to tumor boost PTV. Lungs, heart, esophagus, trachea, liver, thyroid and spinal cord were considered as organs at risk. VMAT feasibility and organ at risk sparing were evaluated by treatments planning of the 20 first enrolled patients. Tolerance and patients' outcome were prospectively monitored by acute/late toxicities records and by the analysis of overall survival (OS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Results: Breast, supraclavicular nodes and boost PTV coverage was adequate with at least 98% of PTV encompassed by more than 95% of the prescribed dose. Less than 90% of IMC PTV was encompassed by 95% of the prescribed dose. Mean lung dose was 12.3Gy (range: 7.7 - 18.7); mean heart dose was 10.7Gy (range: 6.2 - 22.3). Concerning acute toxicities, only 2 patients experienced grade 3 skin toxicity (3.7%) and only 1 patient developed grade 1 pneumonitis. After a median follow-up of 5.3 years, grade 2 fibrosis and/or shrinking was observed in 5 patients (10%), and grade 3 fibrosis in 1 patients (2%). The 5-year LRFS-rate, RFS-rate and OS were 98% [95% CI= 86.12-99.70%], 96% [95% CI= 84.63-98.96%] and 100%, respectively.
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.