ArticleAfrican health sciences2025
Clinical comparison of simultaneous integrated and sequential boost IMRT of tumor bed after breast conserving surgery.
Article in African health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Innovations and African Health Sciences: telling it beyond our environs.African health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To explore the clinical effect compare between the simultaneous-integrated boost and sequential-boost intensity modulated radiotherapy in early breast cancer patients after breast conserving surgery. Methodology: According to the different postoperative radiotherapy methods, 66 early breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery were divided into two groups, 34 in the simultaneous-integrated boost group and 32 in the sequential-boost intensity group. Adverse reactions, cosmetic effects, local recurrence rate, progression-free survival and overall survival rates were compared. Results: No statistical significance in the incidence of acute skin reaction, advanced skin reaction, myelosuppression, radiation pneumonia and other adverse reactions between two groups were observed. The fine rate of simultaneous-integrated boost group was slightly better than the sequential-boost intensity group. And the follow-up rate of the two groups was 100%. The progression-free survival rate of the simultaneous-integrated boost group and the sequential-boost intensity group were 100% and 96.88%, respectively; The overall survival rates of the two groups were all 100%; One patient in the sequential-boost intensity group had recurrence (3.13%), while none in the simultaneous-integrated boost group. No significant difference in local recurrence rate, progression-free survival and overall survival rates in the two groups were found. Conclusion: Simultaneous-integrated boost ensures breast appearance and survival without added radiotherapy side effects vs sequential-boost intensity.
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.