ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Whole-breast Radiotherapy With Boost for Node-negative Breast Cancer: Conventional
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of hypofractionated versus conventional radiotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimMany breast cancer patients receive adjuvant radiotherapy. Tumor bed boost may reduce risk of local failure in high risk patients. We compared hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (WBI) plus boost (HF+boost) and conventionally fractionated WBI plus boost (CF+boost). PATIENTS AND
methodsOne-hundred-and-twenty-eight patients receiving HF-WBI (40 Gy in 15 fractions) plus boost (group A) were matched to 127 patients receiving CF-WBI (50.4 Gy in 28 fractions) plus boost (group B), utilizing 10 characteristics.
resultsGrade ≥2 dermatitis rates were 16.4% in group A vs. 44.1% in group B (p<0.0001), and grade ≥2 pneumonitis rates were 1.6% vs. 2.4% (p=0.68). Four-year rates of local control, metastases-free survival, and overall survival were 100% vs. 99% (p=0.81), 98% vs. 100% (p=0.29), and 98% vs. 100% (p=0.17), respectively.
conclusionHF+boost was associated with significantly less grade ≥2 dermatitis with similar disease control and survival.
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.