The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of a Higher Radiation Dose on Local Control and Survival in Breast-Conserving Therapy of Early Breast Cancer: 10-Year Results of the Randomized Boost Versus No Boost EORTC 22881-10882 Trial
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the long-term impact of a boost radiation dose of 16 Gy on local control, fibrosis, and overall survival for patients with stage I and II breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving therapy. Patients and Methods: A total of 5,318 patients with microscopically complete excision followed by whole-breast irradiation of 50 Gy were randomly assigned to receive either a boost dose of 16 Gy (2,661 patients) or no boost dose (2,657 patients), with a median follow-up of 10.8 years. Results: The median age was 55 years. Local recurrence was reported as the first treatment failure in 278 patients with no boost versus 165 patients with boost; at 10 years, the cumulative incidence of local recurrence was 10.2% versus 6.2% for the no boost and the boost group, respectively (P < .0001). The hazard ratio of local recurrence was 0.59 (0.46 to 0.76) in favor of the boost, with no statistically significant interaction per age group. The absolute risk reduction at 10 years per age group was the largest in patients ≤ 40 years of age: 23.9% to 13.5% (P = .0014). As a result, the number of salvage mastectomies has been reduced by 41%. Severe fibrosis was statistically significantly increased (P < .0001) in the boost group, with a 10-year rate of 4.4% versus 1.6% in the no boost group (P < .0001). Survival at 10 years was 82% in both arms. Conclusion: After a median follow-up period of 10.8 years, a boost dose of 16 Gy led to improved local control in all age groups, but no difference in survival.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1992) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_25 · Cited by 45,181
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1958) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452 · Cited by 39,158
Fisher, B., Anderson, S., Bryant, J., Margolese, R. G., Deutsch, M., Fisher, E. R., Jeong, J.-H., & Wolmark, N. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa022152 · Cited by 6,249
A Class of $K$-Sample Tests for Comparing the Cumulative Incidence of a Competing Risk
Gray, R. J. (1988) · The Annals of Statistics · doi:10.1214/aos/1176350951 · Cited by 4,960
Veronesi, U., Cascinelli, N., Mariani, L., Greco, M., Saccozzi, R., Luini, A., Aguilar, M., & Marubini, E. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa020989 · Cited by 4,450
Pocock, S. J., & Simon, R. (1975) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529712 · Cited by 2,350
van Dongen, J. A. (2000) · Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/92.14.1143 · Cited by 1,271
Bartelink, H., Horiot, J.-C., Poortmans, P., Struikmans, H., Van den Bogaert, W., Barillot, I., Fourquet, A., Borger, J., Jager, J., Hoogenraad, W., et al. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa010874 · Cited by 941
Self-citationJacobson, J. A., Danforth, D. N., Cowan, K. H., d'Angelo, T., Steinberg, S. M., Pierce, L., Lippman, M. E., Lichter, A. S., Glatstein, E., & Okunieff, P. (1995) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199504063321402 · Cited by 892
Cited by
Breast Cancer Treatment: A Review
Waks, A. G., & Winer, E. P. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.19323 · Cited by 4,804
Smith, B. D., Arthur, D. W., Buchholz, T. A., Haffty, B. G., Hahn, C. A., Hardenbergh, P. H., Julian, T. B., Marks, L. B., Todor, D. A., Vicini, F. A., et al. (2009) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.02.031 · Cited by 872
Vaidya, J. S., Joseph, D. J., Tobias, J. S., Bulsara, M., Wenz, F., Saunders, C., Alvarado, M., Flyger, H. L., Massarut, S., Eiermann, W., et al. (2010) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60837-9 · Cited by 772
Moran, M. S., Schnitt, S. J., Giuliano, A. E., Harris, J. R., Khan, S. A., Horton, J., Klimberg, S., Chavez-MacGregor, M., Freedman, G., Houssami, N., et al. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2013.53.3935 · Cited by 451
Invasive Breast Cancer Version 1.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Gradishar, W. J., Anderson, B. O., Balassanian, R., Blair, S. L., Burstein, H. J., Cyr, A., Elias, A. D., Farrar, W. B., Forero, A., Giordano, S. H., et al. (2016) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2016.0037 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Bartelink, H., Horiot, J.-C., Poortmans, P. M., Struikmans, H., Van den Bogaert, W., Fourquet, A., Jager, J. J., Hoogenraad, W. J., Oei, S. B., Wárlám-Rodenhuis, C. C., Pierart, M., & Collette, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2007-08-01
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 3259-3265
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2169031890
- Cited by
- 1,047
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 21.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact of a Higher Radiation Dose on Local Control and Survival in Breast-Conserving Therapy of Early Breast Cancer: 10-Year Results of the Randomized Boost Versus No Boost EORTC 22881-10882 Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2007.11.4991
- The paper
- Bartelink, H., Horiot, J.-C., Poortmans, P. M., Struikmans, H., Van den Bogaert, W., Fourquet, A., Jager, J. J., Hoogenraad, W. J., Oei, S. B., Wárlám-Rodenhuis, C. C., Pierart, M., & Collette, L. (2007). Impact of a Higher Radiation Dose on Local Control and Survival in Breast-Conserving Therapy of Early Breast Cancer: 10-Year Results of the Randomized Boost Versus No Boost EORTC 22881-10882 Trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.11.4991
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
