2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.12.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Randomised trial of standard 2D radiotherapy (RT) versus intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients prescribed breast radiotherapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

14
243
2
5

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 436 publications
(264 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
14
243
2
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Retrospective re-grading of skin reactions in the present pilot study, applying RTOG criteria, produced comparable rates: 3% grade 0, 67% grade 1, 30% grade 2 and no grade 3 or 4 toxicity. However, differences in breast size and radiation dosimetry limit the reliability of this comparison [10,11]. A correlation between breast size and acute toxicity was reported in the RTOG 97-13 study, with small-breasted women developing 11e21% grade 2 or higher skin toxicity compared with 43e50% in large-breasted women.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Retrospective re-grading of skin reactions in the present pilot study, applying RTOG criteria, produced comparable rates: 3% grade 0, 67% grade 1, 30% grade 2 and no grade 3 or 4 toxicity. However, differences in breast size and radiation dosimetry limit the reliability of this comparison [10,11]. A correlation between breast size and acute toxicity was reported in the RTOG 97-13 study, with small-breasted women developing 11e21% grade 2 or higher skin toxicity compared with 43e50% in large-breasted women.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…However, the same limitations apply to this comparison as discussed for acute skin toxicities. In addition, the nine (30%) patients in the pilot study treated with full (three-dimensional) dose compensation may have developed slightly lower levels of late normal tissue effects than if standard two-dimensional dosimetry had been used [10,11]. Late changes in normal tissues are also more sensitive to fraction size than early skin reactions [12].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Change in photographic breast appearance at 2 years was used to define the late adverse effect caused by radiotherapy in this study. This endpoint has been well established and validated in randomised clinical trials, indicating it to be sensitive to small (<10%) differences in randomised total dose [1][2][3]7,11]. The 2-year timepoint is predictive of the relative effects of randomised groups at longer follow up, even though the absolute rate of adverse effects continues to rise for at least a decade and probably for life [7,22,23].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Residual concerns include the impact of dose inhomogeneity on the risk of adverse effects after hypofractionated schedules, so-called 'treble trouble' [8][9][10]. A causal association between breast dose inhomogeneity and the risk of late tissue complications is suggested by the 5 years follow up results of a UK randomised trial (N = 306) comparing 2D versus 3D breast dosimetry [11]. Assuming dose distribution matters, it is not known if residual dose inhomogeneity in patients treated using 3D dose compensation contributes to a higher risk of adverse effects after hypofractionated radiotherapy than after standard regimens.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the use of simple Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) planning techniques improves dose homogeneity within the breast tissue,5, 6 they are currently more labor intensive, requiring greater planning expertise and longer planning times than wedge only compensation 7. In addition to this, the development of more complex treatment techniques for breast cancer patients, such as those incorporating simultaneous integrated boosts or internal mammary lymph node irradiation,8 will lead to a significant workload increase in terms of critical structure delineation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%