ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2026
Prospective monitoring of the clinical implementation of ultrahypofractionated whole-breast radiotherapy using electronic patient-reported outcome measures.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2026. 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: Clinical trials on ultrahypofractionated (UHF) whole‑breast radiotherapy demonstrated non‑inferiority to moderate hypofractionation (HF). However, real-world evidence using modern treatment techniques, captured by fully automated electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROM), remains limited. This study prospectively evaluated the clinical implementation of UHF whole-breast radiotherapy using intensity-modulated/volumetric arc radiotherapy (IMRT/VMAT) with ePROM-based adverse event monitoring. Materials and methods: In this single-centre prospective cohort, consecutive non-metastatic breast cancer patients (breast conserving surgery, no nodal and no boost irradiation) received either HF (15 × 2.67 Gy) or UHF (5 × 5.2 Gy). Acute and late side effects were assessed using PRO‑CTCAE items (itching, radiation skin reaction, skin darkening, pain and breast tenderness) via an automated ePROM platform at the first and last fraction, and at 3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 months. Longitudinal adverse event grades were modelled using population-averaged ordinal generalised estimating equations adjusted for age, surgery, and hormone therapy. Results: The patient cohort of 308 patients included 177 UHF and 131 HF patients. ePROM completion adherence was high (30% drop-out at 24 months). No clinically meaningful differences in adverse event severity were observed between both regimens, except for higher radiation skin reactions at the last fraction in HF (odd ratio (OR) = 2.70). At 24 months, only pain severity differed, with higher odds for HF (OR = 3.08). Other endpoints showed no significant between-group differences. Conclusion: UHF whole-breast radiotherapy delivered with contemporary IMRT/VMAT showed no increase in acute or late patient-reported adverse events compared with HF, confirming its safe integration into clinical routine.
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.