Evidence Hub

Evaluation of normal tissue complications in breast cancer re-irradiation: a meta-analysis study

Amraee A, Mokhayeri Y, Gholami M, Resane S, Evazi MR, Abbasi M, Sadr M, Shamsi S et al.

Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2025

3 citations

Abstract

Background: In recent years, evidence has accumulated that a second method of conserving the breast from cancer with re-irradiation as part of treatment may be feasible and safe. Many oncologists are skeptical of breast re-irradiation due to concerns about late complications, so access to quantitative data on the prevalence of breast re-irradiation complications is very important. In this meta-analysis, we determine the prevalence of complications in normal tissue after breast re-irradiation.

Materials and methods: A search was done to recognize qualified studies using EMBASE, MEDLINE, PUBMED, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Collaboration Library electronic databases from 2000 to 2023. In total, ten primary studies were applied in this meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of complications of disorders, skin fibrosis, and chest pain. Heterogeneity was investigated using the I2 index and the meta-regression to evaluate variables suspected of causing heterogeneity. Statistical analysis and synthesis were performed using Stata 17.

Results: The average dose received by patients who underwent radiation therapy in two stages was 100.32 Gy, and in these patients, the prevalence of skin fibrosis and disorders was 47% (95% CI 71-22%; I2 = 96.76%, P 2 = 98.13%, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: There is little clinical information about the incidence of complications in breast re-irradiation therapy. This meta-analysis presents the prevalence of complications after breast re-irradiation to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free