ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2020
Follow-up Care for Breast Cancer Survivors.
Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cyclophosphamide-Free Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Ovarian Protection in Young Women With Breast Cancer: A Randomized Phase 3 Trial.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Trial
- Ten-year risk of second primary malignancies among chemotherapy-treated early-stage breast cancer survivors: a multicentre cohort study from the Turkish Oncology Group.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Eliciting Older Cancer Patients' Preferences for Follow-Up Care to Inform a Primary Healthcare Follow-Up Model in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2024Article
- Dietary Behavior and Its Association with Nutrition Literacy and Dietary Attitude Among Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Chemotherapy: A Multicenter Survey of Hospitals in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Adherence of long-term breast cancer survivors to follow-up care guidelines: a study based on real-world data from the SURBCAN cohort.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- A qualitative study on the experience of empowerment from the perspectives of breast cancer survivors.Nursing open · 2021Article
- Risk factors associated with loss to follow-up of breast cancer patients: A retrospective analysis.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 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
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer survivorship guidelines recommend at least annual follow-up visits, yet the degree to which this occurs in clinical practice is uncertain. Claims data from a US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) were used to identify women treated with curative intent surgery for newly diagnosed breast cancer between 2006 and 2014. In 25 035 women, median follow-up was 3 years. In the second year after surgery, 9.6% of the patients did not visit a primary care provider, an oncologist, or a surgeon (guideline-nonadherent). The guideline-nonadherent proportion increased from 7.8% in women diagnosed in 2006 to 12.2% in those diagnosed in 2014 (two-sided Wald P < .001). During years 2-6, guideline-nonadherence was also associated with older age, nonwhite race, no radiation, no chemotherapy, no endocrine therapy, and increasing time after surgery. There is a substantial and increasing rate of inadequate follow-up among breast cancer survivors. This has the potential to impair outcomes.
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.