ArticleAdvances in radiation oncology2026
Clinical Outcomes and Institutional Experience of Ultrahypofractionated Radiation Therapy in Patients With Breast Cancer.
Article in Advances in radiation oncology, 2026. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Prompted by COVID-19 and publication of the FAST-Forward study, our institution rapidly implemented ultrahypofractionated radiation therapy (U-HFRT) for patients with early-stage breast cancer. Our objective was to evaluate our early experience and toxicity outcomes for U-HFRT. Methods and Materials: Patients with consecutive stage 0-II breast cancer treated with adjuvant whole breast radiation therapy (RT) were evaluated. Patient demographics and treatment characteristics were extracted and categorized into 2 cohorts: U-HFRT, 26 Gy/5 fractions (F) and M (moderate)-HFRT, 40.05 Gy/15F. Physician-assessed skin toxicity was evaluated using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group radiation morbidity scale at baseline/during RT, 1 to 90 days post-RT and >90 days post-RT. Descriptive statistics summarized patient demographics and treatment characteristics and were stratified based on dose fractionation. A multivariable logistic model evaluated associations between toxicity and fractionation. Results: Between May 2020 and March 2021, 320 patients were evaluated: 133 (41.6%) received U-HFRT and 187 (58.4%) received M-HFRT. For the U-HFRT cohort, median age at diagnosis was 65.4 years (range, 57-73), 71% had hormone receptor-positive invasive disease, and 18% had ductal carcinoma in-situ. All patients received whole breast RT, and 33% received a boost. U-HFRT was used more in patients who were older, hormone receptor-positive, and did not receive a boost ( Conclusions: This study reports real-world clinical outcomes of patients with stage 0-II breast cancer treated with U-HFRT. We observed low rates of acute skin toxicity compared to M-HFRT, confirming its acceptability as a standard regimen for select patients. Longer term follow-up would be necessary to confirm clinical outcomes in terms of both local control and late normal tissue toxicity.
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.