Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20956825›Full record

ReviewJournal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs2010

Local and systemic outcomes in DCIS based on tumor and patient characteristics: the radiation oncologist's perspective.

Nina Bijker, Geertjan van Tienhoven

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. DEGRO practical guidelines: radiotherapy of breast cancer II: radiotherapy of non-invasive neoplasia of the breast.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2014
    Guideline
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

2 authors.

Nina BijkerDepartment of Radiotherapy, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD Amsterdam, the Netherlands. n.bijker@amc.uva.nl
Geertjan van Tienhoven

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Four randomized clinical trials have shown unanimously the benefit of 50 Gy whole-breast radiotherapy in breast-conserving therapy (BCT) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The risk of both DCIS and invasive local recurrence is reduced with about 50%, and this effect is similar for all clinical and histological subgroups analyzed. Younger age and involved margin status are the most important factors for an increased risk of local recurrence. In these subgroups, even with radiotherapy, the observed local recurrence rates are more than 20% at 10 years, which is considerably higher than reported local recurrence rates after BCT for invasive breast cancer. The optimal radiotherapy dose in BCT for DCIS has yet to be established. Also, at present, a subgroup of lesions in which the recurrence rate is so low that radiotherapy can be safely omitted has not yet been identified.

Indexed as

Radiotherapy, AdjuvantAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingCombined Modality TherapyDose-Response Relationship, RadiationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMastectomy, SegmentalMiddle AgedMulticenter Studies as TopicNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasms, Second PrimaryRadiotherapy Dosage

Identifiers

PMID20956825
PMCPMC5161077

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.