ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2021
Adoption of SSO-ASTRO Margin Guidelines for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: What Is the Impact on Use of Additional Surgery?
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Optimal Surgical Margin After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Pure Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Is a 1 mm Margin Sufficient? A Retrospective Single-Center Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Atypical ductal hyperplasia bordering on DCIS on core biopsy is associated with higher risk of upgrade than conventional atypical ductal hyperplasia.Breast cancer research and treatment · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHistorically, more than one-third of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) underwent additional surgery. The SSO-ASTRO guidelines advise 2 mm margins for patients with DCIS having BCS and whole-breast radiation (WBRT). Here we examine guideline impact on additional surgery and factors associated with re-excision. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients treated with BCS for pure DCIS from August 2015 to January 2018 were identified. Guidelines were adopted on September 1, 2016, and all patients had separately submitted cavity-shave margins. Clinicopathologic characteristics, margin status, and rates of additional surgery were examined.
resultsAmong 650 patients with DCIS who attempted BCS, 50 (8%) converted to mastectomy. Of 600 who had BCS as final surgery, 336 (56%) received WBRT and comprised our study group. One hundred twenty-eight (38%) were treated pre-guideline and 208 (62%) were treated post-guideline. Characteristics and margin status were similar between groups. The re-excision rate was 38% pre-guideline adoption and 29% post-guideline adoption (p = 0.09), with 91% having only one re-excision. Re-excision for ≥ 2 mm margins was uncommon (6% pre-guideline vs. 5% post-guideline). On multivariate analysis, younger age (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-0.99, p = 0.02) and larger DCIS size (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.2-1.8, p < 0.001) were predictive of re-excision; guideline era was not. Younger age (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.9-0.97, p < 0.001) and larger size (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.3-2.1, p < 0.001) were predictive of conversion to mastectomy, but residual tumor burden was low.
conclusionsThe SSO-ASTRO guidelines did not significantly change re-excision rates for DCIS in our practice, likely since re-excision for margins ≥ 2 mm was uncommon even prior to guideline adoption, dissimilar to historically observed variations in surgeon practices. Younger age and larger DCIS size were associated with additional surgery.
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.