ArticleCancer biology & medicine2016
Is adjuvant chemotherapy necessary for patients with microinvasive breast cancer after surgery?
Article in Cancer biology & medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of microinvasive breast cancer: A population-based analysis.Cancer medicine · 2022Trial
- Ten-Year Follow-up Clinical Outcomes and the Role of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in HER2-Positive Patients with Microinvasive Breast Cancer.Cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Prognostic Markers of Microinvasive Breast Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2023Review
- Clinicopathological characteristics, treatments, and prognosis of breast ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion: A narrative review.Chronic diseases and translational medicine · 2023Review
- Microinvasive breast cancer and the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Study on Passive Heating Involving Firewalls with an Additional Sunlight Room in Rural Residential Buildings.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Characteristics, prognosis, risk factors, and management of recently diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Study on the Passive Heating System of a Heated Cooking Wall in Dwellings: A Case Study of Traditional Dwellings in Southern Shaanxi, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Prognostic Factors and a Nomogram Predicting Survival in Patients with Breast Ductal Carcinoma in situ with Microinvasion: A Population-Based Study.Clinical epidemiology · 2021Article
- Correlation of size and focality with prognosis in small breast carcinoma: a single institution case series.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2020Article
- Risk factors for lymph node metastasis and the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion: a population-based study.OncoTargets and therapy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSurvival and treatment of patients with microinvasive breast cancer (MIBC) remain controversial. In this paper, we evaluated whether adjuvant chemotherapy is necessary for patients with MIBC to identify risk factors influencing its prognosis and decide the indication for adjuvant chemotherapy.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 108 patients with MIBC were recruited according to seventh edition of the staging manual of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC). The subjects were divided into chemotherapy and non-chemotherapy groups. We compared the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates between groups. Furthermore, we analyzed the factors related to prognosis for patients with MIBC using univariate and multivariate analyses. We also evaluated the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on the prognostic factors by subgroup analysis after median follow-up time of 33 months (13-104 months).
resultsThe 5-year DFS and OS rates for the chemotherapy group were 93.7% and 97.5%, whereas those for the non-chemotherapy group were 89.7% and 100%. RESULTS indicate that 5-year DFS was superior, but OS was inferior, in the former group compared with the latter group. However, no statistical significance was observed in the 5-year DFS (P=0.223) or OS (P=0.530) rate of the two groups. Most relevant poor-prognostic factors were Ki-67 overexpression and negative hormonal receptors. Cumulative survival was 98.2% vs. 86.5% between low Ki-67 (≤20%) and high Ki-67 (>20%). The hazard ratio of patients with high Ki-67 was 16.585 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.969-139.724; P=0.010]. Meanwhile, ER(-)/PR(-) patients with MIBC had cumulative survival of 79.3% compared with 97.5% for ER(+) or PR(+) patients with MIBC. The hazard ratio for ER(-)/PR(-) patients with MIBC was 19.149 (95% CI, 3.702-99.057; P<0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that chemotherapy could improve the outcomes of ER(-)/PR(-) patients (P=0.014), but not those who overexpress Ki-67 (P=0.105).
conclusionsPatients with MIBC who overexpress Ki-67 and with negative hormonal receptors have relatively substantial risk of relapse within the first five years after surgery. However, adjuvant chemotherapy can only improve the outcomes of ER(-)/PR(-) patients, but not those who overexpress Ki-67. Further studies with prolonged follow-up of large cohorts are recommended to assess the prognostic significance and treatment of this lesion.
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.