ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2024
Incidental dose distribution to contralateral internal mammary nodes in breast cancer patients undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: In a relevant number of primary breast cancer patients, lymphatic drainage to the contralateral internal mammary nodes (cIMN) is being observed. Nevertheless, so far lymphatic drainage pathway to the cIMN is largely neglected during adjuvant radiotherapy. Materials and methods: This study evaluated the incidental dose to the cIMN for 120 volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) treatment plans for node positive breast in dependence of internal mammary node irradiation (IMNI) and deep inspiration breath hold (DIBH). Additionally, incidental dose distribution to the cIMN based on the field design in the MA20, EORTC22922/10925 and AMAROS trials was assessed. Results: The incidental dose (Dmean ± SD) to the cIMN-CTV was 13.0 (±4.7) Gy with a maximum dose of < 30 Gy in 113/120 cases. If IMNI was included (n = 80), the Dmean to the cIMN-CTV was significantly higher compared to no IMNI, but still comparably low (n = 40; 14.3 Gy vs. 9.6 Gy; p = 0.0001). Furthermore, the dose in the cIMN during free breathing (n = 80) was higher compared to DIBH (n = 40; 13.9 Gy vs. 11.2 Gy; p = 0.002).Simulated treatment plans based on the randomized RNI trials revealed neglectable dose coverage of the cIMN (Dmean 1.0-1.8 Gy) for all protocols. Conclusion: Neither in the randomized RNI trials nor during contemporary treatment techniques clinically relevant dose distribution to the cIMN was observed. Further studies are warranted to assess the potential impact of intended irradiation of cIMN in high-risk patients.
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.