Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36148372›Full record

ReviewAdvances in radiation oncology

Review of Current Accepted Practices in Identification of the Breast Lumpectomy Tumor Bed.

Pascal Acree, Amee Kapadia, Ronak Mahatme, Lucia Zhang, Darsh Patel, Charlie Almoney, Geonwoo Park, Morgan Kofsky, Shababa Matin, Mehran Habibi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in radiation oncology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Pascal AcreeMedical College of Georgia, Augusta University/University of Georgia Medical Partnership, Athens, Georgia.
Amee KapadiaDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Ronak MahatmeDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Lucia ZhangDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Darsh PatelDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Charlie AlmoneyDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Geonwoo ParkDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Morgan KofskyDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Shababa MatinDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Mehran HabibiDepartment of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Of the 260,000 women diagnosed with breast cancer annually in the United States, more than 60% are treated with breast-conserving surgery or lumpectomy, followed by radiation to decrease the chance of local recurrence. More than 70% of breast cancer recurrences are localized to the original tumor cavity. Hence, targeted radiation therapy after lumpectomy is critical for recurrence prevention. With 30,000 patients annually opting for oncoplastic reconstruction of the breast after lumpectomy to improve cosmesis, the resulting tissue rearrangement increases the difficulty for radiation oncologists to accurately delineate the cavity when planning radiation therapy. Owing to the absence of a standardized protocol, it is important to assess the efficacy of various methods used to mark the tumor cavity for improved delineation. Methods and Materials: A keyword search and analysis was used to compile relevant articles on PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information). Results: Currently, a common practice for tumor cavity localization is applying titanium surgical clips to the borders of lumpectomy cavity. Tissue movement and seroma formation both impact the positioning of surgical clips within the tumor cavity and lead to significant interobserver variability. Furthermore, the main application of surgical clips is to control the small vessels during surgery, and that can create confusion when the same clips are used for tumor bed localization. All alternative solutions present more precise tumor bed delineation but possess individual concerns with workflow integration, patient comfort, and accuracy. Though liquid-based fiducials were found to be the most effective for delineating tumor cavities, there are still drawbacks for clinical use. Conclusions: These findings should encourage medical innovators to develop novel techniques for tumor cavity marking to increase delineation accuracy and effectively target at-risk tissue. Future solutions in this space should consider the properties of liquid-based fiducial markers to improve radiation oncologists' ability to precisely delineate the tumor cavity.

Identifiers

PMID36148372
PMCPMC9486415

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.