ArticlePloS one2021
Usefulness of staging chest-CT in patients with operable breast cancer.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta‑analysis of factors predicting postoperative lung function after lung cancer resection.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2024Pooled it
- Contrast-Enhanced Chest Computed Tomography forDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the usefulness of staging chest-CT in terms of diagnostic yield and false-referral rate in patients with operable breast cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study was approved by the institutional review border. In this retrospective study, we reviewed patients who underwent staging chest-CT between January 2014 and June 2016. Reference standard was defined as a combination of pathology and radiologic tumor changes in accordance with primary tumor or metastatic lesions and stability during the 12-month follow-up period. We calculated diagnostic yield and false-referral rates stratified by pathologic stage. The important ancillary findings of staging chest-CT were also recorded.
resultsA total of 1,342 patients were included in this study. Of these, four patients (0.3%; 4/1342) had true pulmonary metastasis. Diagnostic yields of stage I, II, III disease were 0.0% (0/521), 0.3% (2/693), and 1.6% (2/128), respectively. The overall false-referral rate was 4.6% (62/1342); false-referral rates of stage I, II, and III disease were 5.0% (26/521), 3.8% (26/693), and 7.8% (10/128), respectively. No occult thoracic metastasis occurred within 12 months of staging chest-CT. Nineteen patients showed significant ancillary findings besides lung metastasis, including primary lung cancer (n = 9). The overall diagnostic yield of ancillary findings was 1.7% (23 of 1342).
conclusionsThe incidence of pulmonary metastasis was near zero for pathologic stages I/II and slightly higher (although still low; 1.6%). for stage III. Considering its low diagnostic yield and substantial false-referral rates, staging chest-CT might not be useful in patients with operable breast cancer.
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.