ArticleScientific reports2025
Prediction of acute skin toxicity in tomotherapy of breast cancer using skin DVH data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Investigation and quantification of the relationship between the skin dose-volume histogram (DVH) and the risk of acute skin toxicity in breast cancer patients undergoing Tomotherapy by regression modeling. This prospective study included 52 breast cancer patients treated with Tomotherapy in the dose range of 42.5-60 Gy to the planned target volume. Grading of acute skin toxicity in patients was assessed by the maximum score recorded in weekly follow-ups during and up to three months' post-radiation therapy using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0 guidelines. A superficial layer with a thickness of 2 mm was designated as the Skin Representative Layer (SRL-2) on the Tomotherapy planning, and DVH was extracted for that. Then, multivariable and univariable logistic analyses were performed to identify the most predictive variables of acute skin toxicity from SRL-2 DVH values and patients' clinical parameters. The regression analysis identified V51Gy, representing the absolute SRL-2 volume receiving 51 Gy or more in physical dose, as the most predictive dosimetric parameter for grade 2-3 acute skin toxicity. The optimal cut-off value was 4.74 cc for the physical dose, with an Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve (AUC) value of 0.749, even when adjusted for clinical and treatment-related variables. The logistic model based on V51Gy demonstrated superior calibration, with a slope and R² value approaching 1, indicating better agreement between predicted and observed outcomes. The risk of acute skin toxicity during breast cancer Tomotherapy is correlated with the V
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.