ReviewCureus2026
Clinical Outcomes of Robotic Stereotactic Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation: A Structured Literature Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) has emerged as an evidence-based alternative to whole-breast irradiation (WBI) in appropriately selected patients with early-stage breast cancer. Within this landscape, robotic stereotactic APBI delivered with the CyberKnife (CK) system (Accuray Incorporated, Madison, WI) represents a technologically refined external-beam implementation, integrating non-isocentric beam arrangements, high-frequency image guidance, and optional fiducial-based respiratory tracking that allow steep dose gradients and reduced geometric margins. This structured literature review synthesizes the available clinical, dosimetric, and technical evidence on CK-APBI to define its current role among contemporary APBI modalities. A structured review of peer-reviewed studies published between 2011 and 2025 reporting clinical or dosimetric outcomes of CK-based APBI in early-stage breast cancer was performed. Eligible studies included pilot feasibility reports, phase I/II prospective trials, retrospective cohorts, comparative analyses, and dosimetric evaluations. Endpoints of interest were ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR), acute and late toxicity, cosmetic outcomes, and dose to organs at risk (heart, lungs, uninvolved breast). Patient selection, treatment technique (fiducial placement, simulation, target delineation, motion management, dose-fractionation), and CyberKnife platform evolution (Iris, InCise multileaf collimator) were also evaluated. Across cohorts treated predominantly with 30 Gy in five consecutive daily fractions, CK-APBI achieved low IBTR rates (~0-2%) at intermediate and five-year follow-up, with predominantly grade ≤1 toxicity and excellent or good cosmesis in 80-96% of patients. Phase I dose escalation suggested that late grade 3 fat necrosis correlated with larger planning target volume, reinforcing the importance of strict volume control. Recent data, including a 74-patient cohort using non-invasive skin-fiducial tracking and a long-term cohort with five-year follow-up, confirmed durable local control and preserved cosmesis. Dosimetric analyses demonstrated favorable sparing of uninvolved breast tissue (V50 ~18-25%, V100 <10%), low ipsilateral lung dose, and reduced cardiac exposure in left-sided tumors compared with interstitial brachytherapy. Multileaf collimator-based delivery improved efficiency relative to Iris collimation. Fiducial-based image guidance and respiratory tracking enabled the clinical target volume to planning target volume margin reduction to ~2-3 mm, translating into smaller treated volumes and a plausible mechanistic basis for the favorable toxicity and cosmetic profiles observed. CK-APBI is a clinically mature and technically refined APBI option for appropriately selected early-stage breast cancer patients, with oncologic and cosmetic outcomes broadly concordant with randomized APBI evidence. Margin reduction enabled by image guidance and respiratory tracking provides a distinct technical advantage in limiting intermediate-dose exposure to uninvolved breast tissue and critical organs. However, the evidence base remains predominantly single-institution and non-randomized, with heterogeneous contouring and reporting and limited follow-up beyond five years. Prospective multicenter studies with standardized endpoints are needed to define the relative role of robotic stereotactic APBI among contemporary partial-breast options.
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.