SynthesisThe breast journal2026
Effectiveness and Safety of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS).
Synthesis in The breast journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and Safety of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS).The breast journal · 2026Pooled it
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
objectiveTo synthesize the available evidence on the oncologic outcomes, toxicity, and cosmesis of hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation (HF-WBI) in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS).
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception until July 12, 2025. We included studies of DCIS patients treated with BCS followed by HF-WBI (fraction size > 2.0 Gy). Both comparative studies (against conventional fractionation [CF]) and single-arm studies reporting outcomes for HF-WBI alone were included. Pooled incidence rates for outcomes from single-arm studies and pooled hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) from the limited comparative studies were calculated using random-effects models.
resultsNineteen studies were included. Local control and overall survival were excellent and equivalent between HF-WBI and CF-WBI. The pooled HR for local recurrence comparing ultrahypofractionation to CF was 0.89 (95% CI 0.64-1.24). HF-WBI significantly reduced the odds of acute dermatitis (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13-0.35). Late toxicities were infrequent (e.g., telangiectasia: 2%, 95% CI 0%-5%). Good/excellent cosmesis was reported in 90% (95% CI 84%-94%) of patients.
conclusionHF-WBI is a safe and effective treatment for DCIS, achieving oncologic outcomes equivalent to CF while offering improved tolerability, reduced acute skin toxicity, and excellent cosmetic results. These benefits, combined with increased convenience and potential cost savings, support the integration of HF-WBI into standard practice for DCIS.
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.