ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2017
The method of detection of ductal carcinoma in situ has no therapeutic implications: results of a population-based cohort study.
Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes from low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Pooled it
- Development and Validation of an Algorithm to Achieve Complete Registration of Danish Patients with Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast, 2008-2023.Clinical epidemiology · 2026Article
- Incidence trends of ductal carcinoma in situ in New Zealand women between 1999 and 2022.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Invasive breast cancer and breast cancer death after non-screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ from 1990 to 2018 in England: population based cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Influence of Geodimensional and Histological Parameters on the Need for Margin Widening in Breast Lesions Marked With Magnetic Seeds.European journal of breast health · 2024Article
- Prognostic Score-Based Stratification Analysis Reveals Universal Benefits of Radiotherapy on Lowering the Risk of Ipsilateral Breast Event for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Patients with Different Risk Levels.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Psychological morbidity in women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ compared with women with early breast cancer receiving radiotherapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Article
- Breast cancer screening: Impact on care pathways.Cancer medicine · 2019Article
- Ductal CarcinomaFrontiers in oncology · 2017Review
- Readmissions and complications in breast ductal carcinoma in situ: A retrospective study comparing screen- and non-screen-detected patients.Women's health (London, England)Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPopulation screening with mammography has resulted in increased detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The aim of this population-based cohort study was to assess whether the method of detection should be considered when determining prognosis and treatment in women with DCIS.
methodsThis study includes 7042 women aged 49-75 years, who were surgically treated for primary DCIS between 1989 and 2004 in the Netherlands. We calculated cumulative incidences of ipsilateral and contralateral invasive breast cancer and all-cause mortality among women with screen-detected, interval, or non-screening-related DCIS, and assessed the association between method of detection and these outcomes, using multivariable Cox regression analyses.
resultsCompared with non-screening-related DCIS, women with screen-detected DCIS had a lower risk of developing ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.59-0.96), but a similar risk of contralateral invasive breast cancer (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.67-1.10). The absolute difference in risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer was 1% at 15 years. Screen detection was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.73-0.98); when we additionally accounted for the occurrence of invasive breast cancer the magnitude of this effect remained similar (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.75-1.00).
conclusionsScreen detection was associated with lower risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer and all-cause mortality. However, the absolute difference in risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer was very low and the lower all-cause mortality associated with screen-detected and interval DCIS might be explained by a healthy-user effect. Therefore, our findings do not justify different treatment strategies for women with screen-detected, interval, or non-screening-related DCIS.
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.