Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38590650›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024

Prospective evaluation of patient-reported outcomes of invisible ink tattoos for the delivery of external beam radiation therapy: the PREFER trial.

Camille Hardy-Abeloos, Daniel Gorovets, Aurora Lewis, Wenyan Ji, Alicia Lozano, Chih Chun Tung, Francis Yu, Alexandra Hanlon, Haibo Lin, Anh Kha and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. 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. Impact of prior sexual trauma on patient experience and comfort in breast cancer radiation therapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Evaluation of tattoo reliability in breast cancer re-irradiation.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025
    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

17 authors.

Camille Hardy-AbeloosDepartment of Radiation Oncology, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States.
Daniel GorovetsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
Aurora LewisNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Wenyan JiCenter for Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Department of Statistics, Virginia Tech, Roanoke, VA, United States.
Alicia LozanoCenter for Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Department of Statistics, Virginia Tech, Roanoke, VA, United States.
Chih Chun TungNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Francis YuNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Alexandra HanlonCenter for Biostatistics and Health Data Science, Department of Statistics, Virginia Tech, Roanoke, VA, United States.
Haibo LinNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Anh KhaNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Yoshiya YamadaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
Rafi KabarritiNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Stanislav LazarevNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Shaakir HasanNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Arpit M ChhabraNew York Proton Center, New York, NY, United States.
Charles B SimoneDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.
J Isabelle ChoiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, United States.

Funding

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

Abstract

Introduction: Invisible ink tattoos (IITs) avoid cosmetic permanence of visible ink tattoos (VITs) while serving as more reliable landmarks for radiation setup than tattooless setups. This trial evaluated patient-reported preference and feasibility of IIT implementation. Methods and materials: In an IRB-approved, single institution, prospective trial, patients receiving proton therapy underwent IIT-based treatment setup. A survey tool assessed patient preference on tattoos using a Likert scale. Matched patients treated using our institutional standard tattooless setup were identified; treatment times and image guidance requirements were evaluated between tattooless and IIT-based alignment approaches. Distribution differences were estimated using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests or Chi-square tests. Results: Of 94 eligible patients enrolled, median age was 58 years, and 58.5% were female. Most common treatment sites were breast (18.1%), lung (17.0%) and pelvic (14.9%). Patients preferred to receive IITs versus VITs (79.8% pre-treatment and 75.5% post-treatment, respectively). Patients were willing to travel farther from home to avoid VITs versus IITs (p<0.01). Females were willing to travel (45.5% vs. 23.1%; p=0.04) and pay additional money to avoid VITs (34.5% vs. 5.1%; p<0.01). Per-fraction average +treatment time and time from on table/in room to first beam were shorter with IIT-based vs. tattooless setup (12.3min vs. 14.1min; p=0.04 and 24.1min vs. 26.2min; p=0.02, respectively). Discussion: In the largest prospective trial on IIT-based radiotherapy setup to date, we found that patients prefer IITs to VITs. Additionally, IIT-based alignment is an effective and efficient strategy in comparison with tattooless setup. Standard incorporation of IITs for patient setup should be strongly considered.

Indexed as

image guided radiotherapyproton therapyquality of liferadiation tattoosradiation therapy

Identifiers

PMID38590650
PMCPMC10999588

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.