Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28027219›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery2017

Cancer Risk after Fat Transfer: A Multicenter Case-Cohort Study.

Terence M Myckatyn, I Janelle Wagner, Babak J Mehrara, Melissa A Crosby, Julie E Park, Bahjat F Qaqish, Dominic T Moore, Evan L Busch, Amanda K Silva, Surinder Kaur and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Adipocyte-derived LTB4 programs human NKG2AJournal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Breast fat grafting and cancer: a systematic review of the science behind enhancements and concerns.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2024
    Review
  10. Recent advances in surgical techniques for breast reconstruction.International journal of clinical oncology · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

12 authors.

Terence M MyckatynSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
I Janelle WagnerSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Babak J MehraraSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Melissa A CrosbySt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Julie E ParkSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Bahjat F QaqishSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Dominic T MooreSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Evan L BuschSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Amanda K SilvaSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Surinder KaurSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
David W OllilaSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.
Clara N LeeSt. Louis, Mo.; Chapel Hill, N.C.; New York, N.Y.; Houston, Texas; Chicago and Arlington Heights, Ill.; Boston, Mass.; and Columbus, Ohio.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Virology Research Program (Program 4)P30CA016086 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Deborah F. Tate · 1985 to 2026
$201.5M
Training Program in Cancer EpidemiologyT32CA009001 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI A. Heather Eliassen, Meir Stampfer · 1985 to 2026
$17.3M
Patient Decision Making about Breast Reconstruction after MastectomyK07CA154850 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI LEE, CLARA NAN-HI · 2011 to 2015
$859k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA154850NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016086NCI NIH HHS T32 CA009001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFat transfer is an increasingly popular method for refining postmastectomy breast reconstructions. However, concern persists that fat transfer may promote disease recurrence. Adipocytes are derived from adipose-derived stem cells and express adipocytokines that can facilitate active breast cancer cells in laboratory models. The authors sought to evaluate the association between fat transfer to the reconstructed breast and cancer recurrence in patients diagnosed with local or regional invasive breast cancers.

methodsA multicenter, case-cohort study was performed. Eligible patients from four centers (Memorial Sloan Kettering, M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, and the University of Chicago) were identified by each site's institutional tumor registry or cancer data warehouse. Eligibility criteria were as follows: mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction between 2006 and 2011, age older than 21 years, female sex, and incident diagnosis of invasive ductal carcinoma (stage I, II, or III). Cases consisted of all recurrences during the study period, and controls consisted of a 30 percent random sample of the study population. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate for association between fat transfer and time to recurrence in bivariate and multivariate models.

resultsThe time to disease recurrence unadjusted hazard ratio for fat transfer was 0.99 (95 percent CI, 0.56 to 1.7). After adjustment for age, body mass index, stage, HER2/Neu receptor status, and estrogen receptor status, the hazard ratio was 0.97 (95 percent CI, 0.54 to 1.8).

conclusionIn this population of breast cancer patients who had mastectomy with immediate reconstruction, fat transfer was not associated with a higher risk of cancer recurrence. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Indexed as

MastectomyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCase-Control StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMammaplastyMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalProportional Hazards ModelsRetrospective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID28027219
PMCPMC5428547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.