Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37919752›Full record

SynthesisRadiation oncology (London, England)2023

Comparison of adverse events in partial- or whole breast radiotherapy: investigation of cosmesis, toxicities and quality of life in a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Jan Haussmann, Wilfried Budach, Stefanie Corradini, David Krug, Danny Jazmati, Bálint Tamaskovics, Edwin Bölke, Alessia Pedotoa, Kai Kammers, Christiane Matuschek

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Radiation oncology (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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.

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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jan HaussmannDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. jan.haussmann@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
Wilfried BudachDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Stefanie CorradiniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Ludwig Maximillian University, Munich, Germany.
David KrugDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Danny JazmatiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Bálint TamaskovicsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Edwin BölkeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Alessia PedotoaDepartment of Anesthesiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York, USA.
Kai KammersDepartment of Oncology, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
Christiane MatuschekDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEDüsseldorf University Hospital · DEJohns Hopkins University · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USUniversity of Lübeck · DE

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PURPOSE/

objectiveAdjuvant whole breast radiotherapy and systemic therapy are part of the current evidence-based treatment protocols for early breast cancer, after breast-conserving surgery. Numerous randomized trials have investigated the therapeutic effects of partial breast irradiation (PBI) compared to whole breast irradiation (WBI), limiting the treated breast tissue. These trials were designed to achieve equal control of the disease with possible reduction in adverse events, improvements in cosmesis and quality of life (QoL). In this meta-analysis, we aimed to investigate the differences between PBI and WBI in side effects and QoL. MATERIAL/

methodsWe performed a systematic literature review searching for randomized trials comparing WBI and PBI in early-stage breast cancer with publication dates after 2009. The meta-analysis was performed using the published event rates and the effect-sizes for available acute and late adverse events. Additionally, we evaluated cosmetic outcomes as well as general and breast-specific QoL using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 questionnaires.

resultsSixteen studies were identified (n = 19,085 patients). PBI was associated with a lower prevalence in any grade 1 + acute toxicity and grade 2 + skin toxicity (OR = 0.12; 95% CI 0.09-0.18; p < 0.001); (OR = 0.16; 95% CI 0.07-0.41; p < 0.001). There was neither a significant difference in late adverse events between the two treatments, nor in any unfavorable cosmetic outcomes, rated by either medical professionals or patients. PBI-technique using EBRT with twice-daily fractionation schedules resulted in worse cosmesis rated by patients (n = 3215; OR = 2.08; 95% CI 1.22-3.54; p = 0.007) compared to WBI. Maximum once-daily EBRT schedules (n = 2071; OR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.45-0.79; p < 0.001) and IORT (p = 0.042) resulted in better cosmetic results grade by medical professionals. Functional- and symptom-based QoL in the C30-scale was not different between PBI and WBI. Breast-specific QoL was superior after PBI in the subdomains of "systemic therapy side effects" as well as "breast-" and "arm symptoms".

conclusionThe analysis of multiple randomized trials demonstrate a superiority of PBI in acute toxicity as well breast-specific quality of life, when compared with WBI. Overall, late toxicities and cosmetic results were similar. PBI-technique with a fractionation of twice-daily schedules resulted in worse cosmesis rated by patients.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsQuality of LifeBreastFemaleHumansMastectomy, SegmentalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeBreast cancerCosmesisMeta-analysisPartial breast irradiationQuality of lifeRadiotherapySide effects

Identifiers

PMID37919752
PMCPMC10623828
OpenAlexW4388212319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.