Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In this meta-analysis, we conducted a comparative analysis of the safety and efficacy of hypofractionated and conventional fractionated radiotherapy in individuals who had undergone surgery for breast cancer. METHODS: This study involved a systematic and independent review of relevant research articles published in reputable databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Two investigators conducted the review, which included studies published up to January 3, 2023. The quality of the eligible studies was evaluated and data were extracted using Review Manager software 5.4 (RevMan 5.4) to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The analysis comprised 35 studies and encompassed a collective sample of 18,246 individuals diagnosed with breast cancer. We did not find a statistically significant disparity in efficacy between conventional fractionated (CF) radiotherapy and hypofractionated (HF) radiotherapy regarding local recurrence (LR; OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.76-1.09, P = 0.30), disease-free survival (DFS; OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.01-1.42, P = 0.03), and overall survival (OS; OR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.93-1.26, P = 0.28). Concerning safety, there was no significant difference between the HF and CF regimens in terms of breast pain, breast atrophy, lymphedema, pneumonia, pulmonary fibrosis, telangiectasia, and cardiotoxicity. However, the HF regimen resulted in lower skin toxicity (OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33-0.55, P < 0.01) and improved patient fatigue outcomes (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.60 - 0.88, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no substantial difference in LR, DFS, OS, or many other side effects between the HF and CF regimens, the HF regimen reduces skin toxicity and relieves patient fatigue. If these two issues need to be addressed in clinical situations, the HF regimen may be a superior alternative to conventional radiotherapy in postoperative breast cancer patients.