ArticleMolecular and clinical oncology2019
Clinical assessment of magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiofrequency ablation for breast cancer.
Article in Molecular and clinical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breast cancer: pathogenesis and treatments.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging-guided radiofrequency ablation of breast cancer: a current state of the art review.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the clinical efficacy of Ru'ai Shuhou recipe for the prevention of lung metastases from breast cancer: a retrospective study based on propensity score matching.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Hyperthermia promotes M1 polarization of macrophages via exosome-mediated HSPB8 transfer in triple negative breast cancer.Discover oncology · 2023Article
- Interventional oncology update.European journal of radiology open · 2022Article
- Mediastinal Metastasis of Breast Cancer Mimicking a Primary Mediastinal Tumor.The American journal of case reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for breast cancer patients who cannot undergo traditional surgery. A total of 10 patients were treated by MRI-guided RFA, of whom 6 had stage IV disease (lung metastasis n=3, bone metastasis n=1, liver metastasis n=1 and mediastinal metastasis n=1) and the remaining 4 patients, who refused surgery, had stage III disease accompanied by severe underlying conditions. The changes in feasibility, tumor volume, bleeding, local recurrence, metastasis and complications were evaluated after RFA. The patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, and annually thereafter. A total of 14 RFA sessions were successfully performed (100%) in the 10 patients, among whom 7 patients underwent a single RFA session, 2 patients underwent two sessions, and 1 patient underwent three sessions. Compared with pre-RFA, the volume of the tumors at 6 months after RFA was markedly decreased. There was no local tumor recurrence or metastasis detected during a mean follow-up period of 19.5±3.46 months, and no major complications were reported. Therefore, RFA was found to be a minimally invasive and feasible treatment method in the present study, and MRI-guided RFA may be a promising alternative option for breast cancer patients who are unable to tolerate surgery. However, more prospective studies on the applicability of RFA in breast cancer are required.
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.