Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37696281›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2023

Conventional versus hypofractionated postmastectomy proton radiotherapy in the USA (MC1631): a randomised phase 2 trial.

Robert W Mutter, Sharmila Giri, Briant F Fruth, Nicholas B Remmes, Judy C Boughey, Christin A Harless, Kathryn J Ruddy, Lisa A McGee, Arslan Afzal, Robert W Gao and 12 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

NCT02783690 phase2completednot on this map

A Randomized Trial of 15 Fraction vs 25 Fraction Pencil Beam Scanning Proton Radiotherapy After Mastectomy in Patients Requiring Regional Nodal Irradiation

TypeinterventionalSponsorMayo ClinicRan2016 to 2023Enrolled88ConditionsBreast CancerArmsHypofractionation
NCT06830083 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Hypofractionated Radiation Fractionation in Breast Cancer Patients With Implant-Based Reconstruction

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe First Affiliated Hospital with Nanjing Medical UniversityRan2025 to 2033Enrolled840ConditionsBreast CancerArmsHypofractionated Radiation Therapy, Conventional fraction radiotherapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Epidemiology, early detection, and management of breast cancer in China: A comprehensive review.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Implant-based reconstruction and adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer patients-current status and DEGRO recommendations.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
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

22 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Robert W MutterDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Electronic address: mutter.robert@mayo.edu.
Sharmila GiriDivision of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Briant F FruthDivision of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Nicholas B RemmesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Judy C BougheyDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Christin A HarlessDivision of Plastic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Kathryn J RuddyDivision of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Lisa A McGeeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Arslan AfzalDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Robert W GaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Dean A ShumwayDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Tamara Z Vern-GrossDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Hector R VillarragaDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Stephanie L KenisonDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Yixiu KangDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
William W WongDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Bradley J StishDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Kenneth W MerrellDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Elizabeth S YanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Sean S ParkDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Kimberly S CorbinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Carlos E VargasDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Mayo Clinic in Arizona · USMayo Clinic in Florida · USWinnMed · US

Funding

Women's Cancer ProgramP30CA015083 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Lila J. Rutten · 1985 to 2026
$151.3M
Mayo Clinic Interdisciplinary Women's Health Research ProgramK12HD065987 · NICHD · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KANTARCI, KEJAL · 2010 to 2023
$6.7M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA015083NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD065987
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProton therapy is under investigation in breast cancer as a strategy to reduce radiation exposure to the heart and lungs. So far, studies investigating proton postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) have used conventional fractionation over 25-28 days, but whether hypofractionated proton PMRT is feasible is unclear. We aimed to compare conventional fractionation and hypofractionation in patients with indications for PMRT, including those with immediate breast reconstruction.

methodsWe did a randomised phase 2 trial (MC1631) at Mayo Clinic in Rochester (MN, USA) and Mayo Clinic in Arizona (Phoenix, AZ, USA) comparing conventional fractionated (50 Gy in 25 fractions of 2 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) and hypofractionated (40·05 Gy in 15 fractions of 2·67 Gy [relative biological effectiveness of 1·1]) proton PMRT. All patients were treated with pencil-beam scanning. Eligibility criteria included age 18 years or older, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and breast cancer resected by mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction with indications for PMRT. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either conventional fractionation or hypofractionation, with presence of immediate reconstruction (yes vs no) as a stratification factor, using a biased-coin minimisation algorithm. Any patient who received at least one fraction of protocol treatment was evaluable for the primary endpoint and safety analyses. The primary endpoint was 24-month complication rate from the date of first radiotherapy, defined as grade 3 or worse adverse events occurring from 90 days after last radiotherapy or unplanned surgical interventions in patients with immediate reconstruction. The inferiority of hypofractionation would not be ruled out if the upper bound of the one-sided 95% CI for the difference in 24-month complication rate between the two groups was greater than 10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02783690, and is closed to accrual.

findingsBetween June 2, 2016, and Aug 23, 2018, 88 patients were randomly assigned (44 to each group), of whom 82 received protocol treatment (41 in the conventional fractionation group and 41 in the hypofractionation group; median age of 52 years [IQR 44-64], 79 [96%] patients were White, two [2%] were Black or African American, one [1%] was Asian, and 79 [96%] were not of Hispanic ethnicity). As of data cutoff (Jan 30, 2023), the median follow-up was 39·3 months (IQR 37·5-61·2). The median mean heart dose was 0·54 Gy (IQR 0·30-0·72) for the conventional fractionation group and 0·49 Gy (0·25-0·64) for the hypofractionation group. Within 24 months of first radiotherapy, 14 protocol-defined complications occurred in six (15%) patients in the conventional fractionation group and in eight (20%) patients in the hypofractionation group (absolute difference 4·9% [one-sided 95% CI 18·5], p=0·27). The complications in the conventionally fractionated group were contracture (five [12%] of 41 patients]) and fat necrosis (one [2%] patient) requiring surgical intervention. All eight protocol-defined complications in the hypofractionation group were due to infections, three of which were acute infections that required surgical intervention, and five were late infections, four of which required surgical intervention. All 14 complications were in patients with immediate expander or implant-based reconstruction.

interpretationAfter a median follow-up of 39·3 months, non-inferiority of the hypofractionation group could not be established. However, given similar tolerability, hypofractionated proton PMRT appears to be worthy of further study in patients with and without immediate reconstruction.

fundingThe Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, the Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA, and the US National Cancer Institute.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMastectomyProton TherapyRadiation Dose HypofractionationAdultAgedDose Fractionation, RadiationFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRadiotherapy, AdjuvantTreatment OutcomeUnited States

Identifiers

PMID37696281
PMCPMC10591844
OpenAlexW4386554025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.