ArticlePloS one2022
Does hepatectomy improve outcomes of breast cancer with liver metastasis? A nationwide analysis of real-world data in Taiwan.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Progression-free survival exceeding four years after transarterial embolization for liver metastases from triple-negative breast cancer: a case report.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Does Hepatic Metastasectomy for Breast Cancer Oligo-Metastasis to the Liver Offer Survival Advantage? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsReview
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver metastases from breast cancer are associated with poor prognosis, and treatment options are usually restricted to palliative systemic therapy. The impact of liver resection on metastasis remains controversial. The aim of this study is to investigate whether liver resection can offer better survival outcomes in cases of isolated liver metastases from breast cancer.
methodsWe conducted a nationwide cohort study using a claims dataset from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). We identified all patients with breast cancer (diagnostic code ICD-9: 174.x) from the Registry for Catastrophic Illness Patient Database (RCIPD) of the NHIRD who underwent mastectomy between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2008. Patients with other malignancies (history, initially, or during follow-up), those with a history of metastasis prior to or at initial admission for mastectomy, and those without liver metastases were excluded. Patients with other metastases between mastectomy and liver metastasis and those who died at first admission for liver resection were also excluded. All patients were followed up until December 31, 2013, or withdraw from the database because of death.
resultsData were analyzed for 1,116 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria (resection group: 89; non-resection group: 1,027). There were no differences in age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, or major coexisting diseases except renal disease between two groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated that the liver resection group had significantly better overall survival (OS) than the non-resection group. (1-year: 96.6% vs. 52.3%, 2-year: 86.8% vs. 35.4%, 3-year: 72.3% vs. 25.2%, 5-year: 51.6% vs. 16.9%, respectively, p<0.001). Cox analysis revealed that the liver resection group exhibited a significant improvement in patient survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.321, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.234-0.440, p<0.001).
conclusionThese findings indicate that liver resection may offer better survival benefit in patients with breast cancer who develop new liver metastases post mastectomy.
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.