Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19902459›Full record

ArticleCancer2009

Mammographic density and the risk of breast cancer recurrence after breast-conserving surgery.

Tulin Cil, Eve Fishell, Wedad Hanna, Ping Sun, Ellen Rawlinson, Steven A Narod, David R McCready

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Contrast enhanced mammography in breast cancer surveillance.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Connections between the cell cycle, cell adhesion and the cytoskeleton.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tulin CilDepartment of Surgery, University Health Network, and Department of Radiology, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Eve Fishell
Wedad Hanna
Ping Sun
Ellen Rawlinson
Steven A Narod
David R McCready
Women's College Hospital · CAUniversity Health Network · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen with invasive breast cancer who are treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy face a cumulative risk of local disease recurrence of approximately 10% at 10 years. To the authors' knowledge, the role of mammographic density as a risk factor for the development of local recurrence has not been thoroughly evaluated to date.

methodsMedical records were reviewed for 335 patients who underwent breast-conserving surgery for invasive breast cancer and for whom a pretreatment mammogram was available. Information was recorded concerning mammographic density as well as tumor features, patient characteristics, and adjuvant treatments received. Patients were categorized for mammographic density based on the Wolfe classification as either low (<25% density), intermediate (25-50% density), or high (>50% density). A multivariate survival analysis was conducted using the Cox proportional hazards model with local disease recurrence as the primary endpoint.

resultsPatients in the high mammographic density group experienced a much greater risk of local disease recurrence compared with women with the least dense breasts (10-year actuarial risks: 21% vs 5%; hazards ratio [HR], 5.7 [95% confidence interval, 1.6-20; P=.006]). The difference in the rates of disease recurrence at 10 years was pronounced for women who did not receive radiotherapy (40% vs 0% for patients with >50% density and <25% density, respectively; P<.0001).

conclusionsMammographic breast density is an important risk factor for local breast cancer recurrence among women not receiving breast irradiation. Mammographic density should be taken into consideration when stratifying patients for clinical trials of partial breast radiotherapy. If confirmed, mammographic density might be used to help determine which patients might benefit from radiotherapy.

Indexed as

MammographyMastectomy, SegmentalNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID19902459
OpenAlexW2002533063

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.