ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2021
Trend and survival benefit of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among men with stage I-III unilateral breast cancer in the USA, 1998-2016.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hotspots and future trends of male breast cancer: a global perspective.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- EBCC-13 manifesto: Balancing pros and cons for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOur study aimed to explore temporal trends and survival benefit of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in male breast cancer (MBC).
methodsMen with stage I-III unilateral breast cancer between 1998 and 2016 were identified from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER). We compared CPM rate over the study period using the Cochrane-Armitage test for trend. Logistic regression model was used to test for factors predicting CPM. Survival analysis was conducted in patients who underwent CPM or unilateral mastectomy (UM) with a first diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer. Kaplan-Meier curve and univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to compare overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between CPM and UM groups. Propensity score matching was adopted to balance baseline characteristics.
results5118 MBC cases were included in the present study, with 4.1% (n = 209) patients underwent CPM. The proportion of men undergoing CPM increased from 1.7 in 1998 to 6.3% in 2016 (P < 0.0001). Young age, recent years of diagnosis, higher tumor grade and lower T stage were significantly associated with CPM. A cohort of 3566 patients were enrolled in survival analysis with a median follow-up of 65 months. CPM was associated with better OS (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.37-0.89, P = 0.022) rather than BCSS (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.29-1.11, P = 0.153) compared with UM. In propensity score-matched model, CPM was not an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.46-1.52, P = 0.553) and BCSS (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.39-2.47, P = 0.970).
conclusionOur study revealed a dramatic increase in CPM utilization among MBC, especially in young patients. However, CPM provides no survival benefit for MBC compared with UM, indicating the decision of CPM should be fully discussed.
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.