ArticleMedicine2020
Comparison of breast ductal carcinoma in situ and ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion, and analysis of axillary lymph node metastasis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microinvasive breast cancer and the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractTo compare the clinicopathologic features and long-term outcomes for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) vs DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM), to assess the impact of microinvasion on tumor size and determine relationships between the number of microinvasive lesions and clinicopathological factors.A total of 493 patients with DCIS or DCISM from our database were analyzed to assess differences in clinicopathologic features and outcomes between the 2 cohorts.The median follow-up was 3.9 years, 229 patients had DCIS and 264 had DCISM, and the mean age was 46.8 years for the entire group. A total of 208 patients underwent axillary operation in the DCIS cohort vs 246 in the DCISM cohort, and the number of lymph node metastasis cases was 0 vs 13 for the 2 groups. For the lymph node-positive cases, the proportion of patients with no less than 3 microinvasive legions was 61.5% (8/13), while in the lymph node-negative group, the proportion of patients was 31.1% (78/251) (P < .05). For the DCIS and DCISM groups, the relapse-free survival (RFS) values were 99.0% and 95.4% (P = .034), while the overall survival (OS) values were 96.2% and 99.2% (P = .032), respectively.Our data imply that for breast DCIS patients, axillary lymph node operation can be avoided, but for DCISM patients, surgical evaluation of the axilla is necessary. In addition, having no less than 3 microinvasive lesions in DCISM indicates poor prognosis. In the pathological staging of DCISM, tumor size and number of microinvasive lesions should be considered.
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.