Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32705510›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2020

Surgery for Men with Breast Cancer: Do the Same Data Still Apply?

Jennifer K Plichta, Yi Ren, Caitlin E Marks, Samantha M Thomas, Rachel A Greenup, Laura H Rosenberger, Oluwadamilola M Fayanju, Susan G R McDuff, E Shelley Hwang, Jeremy Force

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer K PlichtaDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. jennifer.plichta@duke.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7411-0558
Yi RenDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Caitlin E MarksDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Samantha M ThomasDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Rachel A GreenupDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Laura H RosenbergerDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Oluwadamilola M FayanjuDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Susan G R McDuffDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
E Shelley HwangDepartment of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Jeremy ForceDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Duke Medical Center · USDuke University · USDuke Cancer Institute

Funding

Women's Cancer Research ProgramP30CA014236 · NCI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JOHN N. NORTON · 1985 to 2026
$174.8M
Using Modifiable Risk Factors to Predict Inferior Care and Survival after Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Novel Approach to Addressing Health DisparitiesK08CA241390 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI FAYANJU, OLUWADAMILOLA M. · 2019 to 2023
$1.1M
NCI NIH HHS K08 CA241390NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014236NIH HHS 1K08CA241390NIH HHS P30CA014236
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMen represent a small proportion of breast cancer diagnoses, and they are often excluded from clinical trials. Current treatments are largely extrapolated from evidence in women. We compare practice patterns between men and women with breast cancer following the publication of several landmark clinical trials in surgery. PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients with invasive breast cancer (2004-2015) from the National Cancer Data Base were identified; subcohorts were created based on eligibility for NSABP-B06, CALGB 9343, and ACOSOG Z0011. Practice patterns were stratified by gender and compared. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were utilized to estimate the association between OS and gender.

resultsOf the 1,664,746 patients identified, 99% were women and 1% were men. Among NSABP-B06 eligible men, mastectomy rates did not change (consistently ~ 80%), and their adjusted OS was minimally worse compared with women (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.11-1.28). Following publication of CALGB 9343, omission of radiation after lumpectomy was less likely in men and lagged behind that of women, despite similar OS (male HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.59-1.44). Application of ACOSOG Z0011 findings resulted in deescalation of axillary surgery for men and women with comparable OS (male HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.33-1.45).

conclusionsUptake of clinical trial results for men with breast cancer often mirrors that for women, despite exclusion from these studies. Furthermore, when study findings were applied to eligible patients, men and women demonstrated similar survival. Observational studies can help inform the potential application of study findings to this unique population and improve patient enrollment in clinical trials.

Indexed as

Breast Neoplasms, MaleAgedHumansLymph Node ExcisionMaleMastectomyMastectomy, SegmentalMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyBreast radiationBreast surgeryLocal–regional therapyMale breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID32705510
PMCPMC7554146
OpenAlexW3045407645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.