ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2025
Comparison of simultaneous integrated tumor bed boost and sequential boost during hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and cosmetic outcomes of radiotherapy modalities in early-stage breast cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Long-term cosmetic outcome after intraoperative radiotherapy boost with low-energy X-rays in breast-conserving therapy: a pooled cohort analysis of the TARGIT-BQR and ROKSM trials.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2026Trial
- Breast Edema in Women With Arm Lymphedema Following Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Influencing factors of significant breast edema in breast cancer patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery during radiotherapy with DIBH.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: This study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) and sequential boost (SeB) during hypofractionated WBI. Materials and methods: This study analyzed data from two prospective studies, including 1,132 patients with pT1-3 N0-3 M0 breast cancer, of whom 775 received SIB and 357 received SeB. The prescribed dose was 43.5 Gy in 15 fractions to whole breast and/or nodal region, with either 49.5 Gy in 15 fractions (SIB) or 8.7 Gy in 3 fractions (SeB) delivered to tumor bed. Outcomes analyzed included survival outcomes, treatment-related toxicities, and cosmetic outcomes. Results: The 5-year outcomes were local control rates of 97.8 % vs. 98.8 % ( Conclusion: SIB is a viable alternative to SeB, offering comparable toxicity profiles and survival outcomes while shortening treatment duration. Longer follow-up is warranted to assess long-term outcomes.
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.