Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30709048›Full record

ArticleCancers2019

Mastectomy or Breast-Conserving Therapy for Early Breast Cancer in Real-Life Clinical Practice: Outcome Comparison of 7565 Cases.

Stefanie Corradini, Daniel Reitz, Montserrat Pazos, Stephan Schönecker, Michael Braun, Nadia Harbeck, Christiane Matuschek, Edwin Bölke, Ute Ganswindt, Filippo Alongi and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 99 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Stefanie CorradiniDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU University, 81377 Munich, Germany. stefanie.corradini@med.uni-muenchen.de.ORCID 0000-0001-8709-7252
Daniel ReitzDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU University, 81377 Munich, Germany. daniel.reitz@med.uni-muenchen.de.ORCID 0000-0003-0539-9092
Montserrat PazosDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU University, 81377 Munich, Germany. montserrat.pazos@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Stephan SchöneckerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU University, 81377 Munich, Germany. stephan.schoenecker@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Michael BraunDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Red Cross Hospital, 80637 Munich, Germany. michael.braun@swmbrk.de.
Nadia HarbeckBreast Center, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, LMU University, 81377 Munich, Germany. nadia.harbeck@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Christiane MatuschekDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, Medical faculty, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany. matuschek@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
Edwin BölkeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Heinrich Heine University, Medical faculty, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany. boelke@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
Ute GanswindtDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Medical University, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria. ute.ganswindt@i-med.ac.at.
Filippo AlongiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, 37024 Negrar-Verona, University of Brescia, 25121 Brescia, Italy. filippo.alongi@sacrocuore.it.
Maximilian NiyaziDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU University, 81377 Munich, Germany. maximilian.niyazi@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Claus BelkaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, LMU University, 81377 Munich, Germany. claus.belka@med.uni-muenchen.de.
LMU Klinikum · DEHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEGerman Red Cross · DEInnsbruck Medical University · ATLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEOspedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the organ preservation strategy by breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by radiation therapy (BCT) has revolutionized the treatment approach of early stage breast cancer (BC), the choice between treatment options in this setting can still vary according to patient preferences. The aim of the present study was to compare the oncological outcome of mastectomy versus breast-conserving therapy in patients treated in a modern clinical setting outside of clinical trials. 7565 women diagnosed with early invasive BC (pT1/2pN0/1) between 1998 and 2014 were included in this study (median follow-up: 95.2 months). In order to reduce selection bias and confounding, a subgroup analysis of a matched 1:1 case-control cohort consisting of 1802 patients was performed (median follow-up 109.4 months). After adjusting for age, tumor characteristics and therapies, multivariable analysis for local recurrence-free survival identified BCT as an independent predictor for improved local control (hazard ratio [HR]:1.517; 95%confidence interval:1.092⁻2.108,

Indexed as

breast cancerbreast-conserving therapycomparative effectivenessmastectomyoutcome

Identifiers

PMID30709048
PMCPMC6406394
OpenAlexW2912638491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.