Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31187142›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2019

A Network Meta-Analysis of Surgical Treatment in Patients With Early Breast Cancer.

Yu Gui, Xunzhou Liu, Xianchun Chen, Xi Yang, Shichao Li, Qingwen Pan, Xiangdong Luo, Li Chen

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Current Resources for Evidence-Based Practice, November 2020.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yu Gui
Xunzhou Liu
Xianchun Chen
Xi Yang
Shichao Li
Qingwen Pan
Xiangdong Luo
Li Chen
Army Medical University · CNSouthwest Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn early breast cancer treatment, the preferred surgical regimen remains a topic of controversy, and conventional pairwise meta-analysis cannot provide a hierarchy based on clinical trial evidence. Therefore, a network meta-analysis was performed both for direct and indirect comparisons and to assess the survival outcomes of surgical regimens.

methodsRandomized clinical trials comparing different surgical regimens for the treatment of early breast cancer were identified. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were analyzed using random-effects network meta-analysis on the hazard ratio (HR) scale and calculated as combined HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided.

resultsThe network meta-analysis compared 11 different surgical regimens that consisted of 13 and 17 direct comparisons between strategies for OS (34 trials; n = 23 587 patients) and DFS (32 trials; n = 22 552 patients), respectively. The values of surface under the cumulative ranking for OS and DFS after mastectomy (M)+radiotherapy (RT) were observed to be the largest. Breast-conserving surgery (BCS)+axillary node sampling+RT almost achieved the threshold for inferiority compared with the other surgical treatment arms and was statistically significantly associated with worse OS (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.94; HR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.92; HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.96). No statistically significant difference between BCS+sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)+RT vs BCS+SLNB+intraoperative RT was observed in carrying out network meta-analysis (HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.36).

conclusionsM+RT has the most favorable survival outcomes among the various surgical regimens for the treatment of early breast cancer patients. For patients who receive BCS, SNLB has more favorable outcomes than axillary node sampling. Intraoperative RT and postoperative RT have similar outcomes in patients who receive SLNB.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremBreast NeoplasmsDisease ManagementFemaleHumansMastectomyNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurvival AnalysisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID31187142
PMCPMC6748720
OpenAlexW2949129281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.