Trial reportPloS one2022
Investigating the effectiveness of adjuvant therapy for patients with hormone receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ.
Trial report in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Prognostic Implications of Calcification and Surgery Type by Estrogen Receptor and HER2 Status in Ductal CarcinomaJournal of breast cancer · 2026Article
- Personalized circulating tumor DNA response to local radiotherapy in a patient with an early lobular breast cancer: A case report.Oncology letters · 2024Article
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
backgroundThis study compared the recurrence risk of single versus dual adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and hormonal therapy (HT) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
methodsThis retrospective cohort study used the Taiwan Cancer Registry database linking to the Taiwan National Health Insurance data from 2011 to 2016. We compared the recurrence risk between BCS-based regimens in Cox regressions and presented as adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI).
resultsThe 1,836 study cohort with a low-to-intermediate risk of recurrence was grouped into BCS alone (6.1%), BCS+RT (6.2%), BCS+HT (23.4%) and BCS+HT+RT (64.3%) according to the initial treatments. During the follow-up (median: 3.3 years), the highest 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was in BCS+RT (94.1%) group and followed by BCS+HT+RT (92.8%), BCS+HT (87.4%) and BCS alone (84.9%). Of the single adjuvant therapies, RT was more effective than HT. Both BCS+HT (HR: 1.52, 95%CI: 0.99-2.35) and BCS+RT (HR: 1.10, 95%CI: 0.50-2.41) did not significantly increase recurrence risk comparing against the BCS+HT+RT group.
conclusionSingle adjuvant demonstrated a similar subsequent recurrence risk with dual adjuvant. This study supports the proposition to de-escalate adjuvant treatments in patients with low-to-intermediate risk of DCIS recurrence.
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.