Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18506537›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2008

Presence of lobular carcinoma in situ does not increase local recurrence in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy.

Robin M Ciocca, Tianyu Li, Gary M Freedman, Monica Morrow

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Pleomorphic lobular carcinomaOncology letters · 2016
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Robin M CioccaDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Tianyu Li
Gary M Freedman
Monica Morrow
Fox Chase Cancer Center · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Margaret von Mehren · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is known to be a risk factor for the development of invasive breast cancer. Debate continues as to whether LCIS is also a precursor lesion. We hypothesized that, if LCIS were a precursor, its presence in the lumpectomy specimen, particularly at the margin, could increase local recurrence (LR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT).

methods2894 patients treated with BCT for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), stage I or II breast cancer between 1/80 and 5/07 were identified. Patients with DCIS or invasive cancer at the margins or those receiving neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. Group A had 290 patients with LCIS in the lumpectomy; 84 had LCIS at the final margin. Group B included 2604 patients with no evidence of LCIS.

resultsMedian patient age in group A and B was 57 and 58 years, respectively (P = 0.05); 12% and 13%, respectively, of patients in group A and B had margins <2 mm (P = NS). The histologic distribution of tumor types in group A was lobular in 47.2%, ductal in 34.5%, DCIS in 11.4%, and other invasive histologies in 6.9%, compared with 4.1%, 76.3%,13.6%, and 6.0% for group B, respectively (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between the groups in tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage. The crude rate of LR was 4.5% in group A and 3.8% in group B (P = NS). Five- and 10-year actuarial LR rates for LCIS at the margin were 6% and 6%, 1% and 15% for LCIS present but not at the margin, and 2% and 6% for no LCIS (P = NS), for group A and B, respectively. In multivariate analysis, menopausal status and adjuvant therapy use were significant predictors of LR. LCIS, either in the specimen or at the margin, was not significantly associated with LR.

conclusionPresence of LCIS, even at the margin, in BCT specimens does not have an impact on LR. Re-excision is not indicated if LCIS is present or close to margin surfaces. These findings do not support consideration of LCIS as a precursor to the development of invasive lesions.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma in SituCarcinoma, LobularFemaleHumansMastectomy, SegmentalMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, Local

Identifiers

PMID18506537
PMCPMC2701545
OpenAlexW2022172936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.