ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2019
Long-term outcomes of immediate autologous breast reconstruction after definite adjuvant therapy in intermediate and locally advanced breast cancer.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Locally advanced breast cancer patients should be cautious about the immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy: a pooling analysis of safety and efficacy.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Meta-Analysis of Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Versus Autologous Breast Reconstruction in the Setting of PMRT.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison between surgery plus radiotherapy and radiotherapy alone in treating breast cancer patients with ipsilateral supraclavicular lymph node metastasis.Gland surgery · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo analyze oncologic outcomes and reconstruction quality in locally advanced stage breast cancer after performing immediate autologous breast reconstruction (IABR).
methodsFrom 2007 to 2014, data of patients aged ≤70 years old with stage II-III breast cancer who received total mastectomy (TM) were extracted from medical records. Exclusion criteria were: previous contralateral breast cancer, follow-up loss before adjuvant therapy completion, and artificial reconstruction. Patients were divided into two groups: (I) TM alone, and (II) TM + IABR. Overall survival (OS) and loco-regional recurrence free survival (LRRFS) were calculated. Times of minor revision, abnormal image findings in breast, and change of breast height were observed.
resultsSixty-one of 188 patients received IABR after TM. Stage IIIB-C was the most important prognostic factor for OS (P<0.001) and LRRFS (P<0.001). For stage II, five-year TM and TM + IABR OS rates were 96.8% and 100% (P=0.324), respectively. For stage IIIB-C, five-year TM and TM + IABR OS rates were 57.6% and 62.5% (P=0.544), respectively. For stage II, five-year TM and TM + IABR LRRFS were 98.1% and 95.7% (P=0.998), respectively. For stage IIIB-C, five-year TM and TM + IABR LRRFS were 70.8% and 62.5% (P=0.378), respectively. Two major complications were observed after IABR. Minor revisions, abnormal image findings, and change of breast height were common without showing significant relation with adjuvant radiotherapy or tumor stage.
conclusionsIABR showed feasible oncologic outcomes in 5-year follow-up. Adjuvant radiotherapy had little effect on quality of reconstruction. However, IABR in advanced stage should be cautiously applied considering expected survival and minor problems after IABR.
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.