ReviewBreast cancer : basic and clinical research2018
Clinicopathologic Features and Radiation Therapy Utilization in Patients with Male Breast Cancer: A National Cancer Database Study.
Review in Breast cancer : basic and clinical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Male breast cancer: from extrapolated practice to evidence-based care.The oncologist · 2026Review
- Clinicopathological, multimodal treatment, and survival patterns for men with breast cancer in England and Wales: a population-based cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Radiotherapy and surgery for male breast cancer a population analysis of survival by age and stage.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Current Perspectives on Non-Metastatic Male Breast Cancer: Genetics, Biology, and Treatment Advances: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Real-world assessment of thromboembolic risk associated with tamoxifen.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Long-term trends in the incidence of male breast cancer and nomogram for predicting survival in male breast cancer patients: a population-based epidemiologic study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Health education actions on male breast cancer: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis.Medicine · 2022Article
- Inflammatory Breast Cancer in a 53-Year-Old Man.Advanced biomedical research · 2022Article
- Poor prognosis of male triple-positive breast Cancer patients: a propensity score matched SEER analysis and molecular portraits.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- An updated review of epidemiology, risk factors, and management of male breast cancer.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2021Review
- Male breast cancer: clinicopathological characterization of a National Danish cohort 1980-2009.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2020Article
- Development and Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Survival in Male Patients With Breast Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Establishment of Prognostic Nomogram for Male Breast Cancer Patients: A Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Database Analysis.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
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
Abstract
Male breast cancer (MBC) accounts for approximately 1% of all breast cancers, limiting the data characterizing clinicopathologic features and treatment outcomes in patients with MBC. This paucity of data has led to most of our treatment guidance being extrapolated from patients with female breast cancer (FBC). From 1998 to 2012, data were captured using the National Cancer Database to identify patients with nonmetastatic MBC (n = 23 305) and FBC (n = 2 678 061). Tumor and clinicopathologic features were obtained and compared. Patients with MBC were more likely to have invasive disease, T2-4 tumors, centrally located tumors, positive lymph nodes, estrogen receptor-positive or progesterone receptor-positive tumors, lymphovascular space invasion, and were less likely to have Her2/neu-positive or triple-negative tumors. All of these differences were statistically significant (
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.