ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2018
Quality of Breast Cancer Surgical Pathology Reports
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumor-stroma type and tumor-stroma ratio predict neoadjuvant chemotherapy response in breast cancer.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2025Article
- Examining the Completeness of Breast Cancer Pathology Reports Registered in the Population-Based Cancer Registration System in Iran during 2016 to 2018.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024Article
- [Adequacy of histopathology request forms and pathological reports of breast cancer surgical specimens in Benin].Medecine tropicale et sante internationale · 2023Article
- A review of breast cancer pathology reports in Nigeria.Ecancermedicalscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Surgical pathology reporting of breast cancer is needed for appropriate staging and treatment decisions. We here checked the quality of surgical pathology reports of breast cancer from different laboratories of Karachi, Pakistan. Methods: One hundred surgical pathology reports from ten different laboratories of Karachi were assessed for documentation of elements against a checklist adopted from the CAP guideline over a period of six months from January, 2017 to June, 2017 in the Oncology Department, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre, Karachi. Results: Out of 100 reports, clinical information was documented in 68%, type of procedure and lymph node sampling in 84% and 34% respectively. Specimen laterality was mentioned in 90%, tumor site in 44%, tumor size in 92%, focality in 40%, histological type in 96%, grade in 87%, LCIS in 19%, DCIS in 83%, size of DCIS in 19%, architectural pattern in 26% , nuclear grade in 17%, necrosis in 14%, excision margin status in 91%, invasive component in 83%, DCIS in 16%, lymph node status in 91% with positive nodes in 56%, size of macro met in 54%, extranodal involvement in 48%, lymph vascular invasion in 86%, treatment effects in 31%, and pathology reporting with TNM in 57%. Conclusion: This study shows that the quality of surgical pathology reports for breast cancer in Karachi is not satisfactory. Therefore, there is great need to create awareness among histopathologists regarding the importance of accurate breast cancer surgical pathology reporting and to introduce a standardized checklist according to international guidelines for better treatment planning.
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.