Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34017965›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2020

Effectiveness and Safety of Magseed-localization for Excision of Breast Lesions: A Prospective, Phase IV Trial.

Puneet Singh, Marion E Scoggins, Aysegul A Sahin, Rosa F Hwang, Henry M Kuerer, Abigail S Caudle, Elizabeth A Mittendorf, Alastair M Thompson, Isabelle Bedrosian, Mediget Teshome and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Evolution of localization methods for non-palpable breast lesions: a literature review from a translational medicine perspective.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  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

13 authors.

Puneet SinghDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Marion E ScogginsDepartment of Breast Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Aysegul A SahinDepartment of Anatomical Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Rosa F HwangDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Henry M KuererDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Abigail S CaudleDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Elizabeth A MittendorfDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Alastair M ThompsonDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Isabelle BedrosianDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Mediget TeshomeDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Sarah M DeSnyderDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Funda Meric-BernstamDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Kelly K HuntDepartment of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA prospective, phase IV study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Magseed to localize breast lesions requiring surgical excision.

backgroundSince FDA approval in 2016, Magseed has been increasingly used to localize non-palpable lesions due to advantages over wires or radioactive seeds. This is the first prospective, post marketing trial of Magseed.

methodsFrom 1/2017-2/2018, 107 women with lesions requiring localization were enrolled at a single institution. Primary endpoint was Magseed retrieval rate. Secondary endpoints were adverse events, accuracy of placement, surgery duration and positive margin rate. Clinicians were surveyed for ease of use using a Likert scale. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test were performed to assess univariable associations with positive margins.

resultsThere were 124 Magseeds placed including one marker in 93 subjects, 2 markers in 11 and 3 markers in 3. The majority of lesions were masses (63%) followed by calcifications (24%). All 124 Magseeds were placed within 10mm of the target lesion and surgically retrieved with median operative time of 15min (range 4-47). No device-related adverse events occurred. Of the 98 malignant lesions, 9 had positive margins and 7 of them underwent a second surgery for additional margins. On univariable analysis, age ≤ 50 (25.0% vs 6.4%,

conclusionsThe Magseed system for localization of non-palpable lesions was effective and safe; all markers were successfully retrieved with margin-negative resections in 91%. This study supports use of Magseed for localization of breast lesions.

Identifiers

PMID34017965
PMCPMC8130552

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.