ArticleBritish journal of cancer2008
High rates of breast conservation for large ductal and lobular invasive carcinomas combining multimodality strategies.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Differences in sensitivity to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among invasive lobular and ductal carcinoma of the breast and implications on surgery-A systematic review and meta-analysis.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2022Pooled it
- Relative Effectiveness of Letrozole Compared With Tamoxifen for Patients With Lobular Carcinoma in the BIG 1-98 Trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2015Trial
- Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: metastatic patterns and treatment modalities-a review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Predictors of lymphovascular invasion in estrogen receptor positive/Her-2 negative breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2022Article
- Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are associated with poor prognosis in invasive lobular breast carcinoma.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2020Article
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
The literature reports low rates of breast conservation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancers not amenable to initial breast-conserving surgery. This study aims to compare the outcome of lobular vs ductal carcinomas after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Between 1989 and 1999, 750 patients with clinical stage II/IIIA ductal (672) or lobular (78) invasive breast carcinomas were treated at the Institut Curie with primary anthracycline-based polychemotherapy followed by either breast conservation (surgery and/or radiotherapy) or mastectomy. Median follow-up was 10 years. Clinical response to primary chemotherapy was significantly worse for lobular than for ductal carcinomas (47 vs 60%; P=0.04), but only histological grade remained predictive in multivariate analysis. Breast conservation was high for both ductal and lobular carcinomas (65 and 54%; P=0.07), due, in part, to the use of radiotherapy, either exclusive or preoperative, for respectively 26 and 40% of patients. The lobular type had no adverse effect, neither on locoregional control nor on overall survival, even in the group of patients treated with breast conservation.
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.