ArticleRadiation oncology (London, England)2026
Clinical evaluation using first-day assessment of patient suitability for successful performance of deep inspiration breath-hold for breast cancer radiotherapy.
Article in Radiation oncology (London, England), 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) is a radiotherapy standard technique for cardiac-sparing in breast cancer, particularly for left-sided tumors. However, not all patients can successfully complete DIBH RT in clinical routine, necessitating conversion to free breathing (FB) techniques and replanning. This study aimed to identify clinical factors predictive of DIBH feasibility to optimize patient selection and resource utilization.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed all patients (n = 1920) who underwent curative postoperative breast cancer radiotherapy at our institution between May 2020 and December 2024. All patients underwent initial DIBH feasibility assessment and were evaluated for completion of radiotherapy with DIBH or conversion to FB technique. A detailed subanalysis was performed for all patients treated in 2023 (n = 470). Patient-related factors including age, body mass index (BMI), Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), pulmonary comorbidities, smoking status, and geometric surface distance between DIBH and FB planning scans were collected for the subanalysis.
resultsAcross the entire cohort (years 2020-2024) of 1,920 patients, 78 replannings (4%) occurred due to conversion from DIBH to free breathing. Increasing age (cut-off of 63 years) was significantly associated with higher replanning rates (p = 0.001). In the 2023 subanalysis (n = 470), pulmonary comorbidities (p = 0.008), higher CCI (p = 0.044), and a geometric surface distance of below 1 cm between DIBH and FB CT scans (p = 0.0001) were significant predictors of replanning. The Karnofsky Performance Score, BMI, and smoking status showed no significant association with replanning.
conclusionsAge, pulmonary comorbidities, overall comorbidity burden, and insufficient geometric displacement are significant predictors of DIBH failure in breast cancer radiotherapy. These readily available clinical parameters can optimize patient selection algorithms and inform decisions regarding dual CT simulation workflows. A risk-stratified approach incorporating these factors may reduce unnecessary imaging, decrease planning burden, and improve resource allocation while maintaining optimal cardiac protection for appropriate candidates. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS; registration number: DRKS00038550) on 22 December 2025 ( https://www.drks.de/ ).
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.