SynthesisPeerJ2023
Comparative efficacy of intraoperative radiotherapy and external boost irradiation in early-stage breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- TARGIT-IORT in early breast cancer-real world evidence for a risk-adapted approach.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025Article
- Intraoperative radiotherapy might not serve as a standard therapy for retroperitoneal liposarcoma: insights from a population-based propensity score-matched study.Frontiers in 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
External boost radiotherapy (EBRT) and intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) are shown to be effective in patients with early-stage breast cancer. However, the difference between IORT and EBRT for patients' prognosis remains to be elucidated. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to investigate differences in local recurrence (LR), distant metastases, disease free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) between these two therapies. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science and Embase, from inception to Jan 10th, 2022. We used The Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool to assess the risk of bias of the included studies, and the STATA15.0 tool was used for the meta-analyses. Eight studies were ultimately included. Meta-analysis demonstrated that there was an inconsistent finding in the long-term risk of LR between the two radiotherapies, and there was no significant difference in short-term risk of LR, the metastasis rate, DFS, and OS IORT would be more convenient, less time-consuming, less costly, and more effective at reducing side effects and toxicity. However, these benefits must be balanced against the potential for increased risk of LR in the long term.
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.