ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Development and Validation of a Prediction Model for Positive Margins in Breast-Conserving Surgery.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bracketed Lumpectomy: A Comparison of Radiofrequency Identification Tag Localization to Wire Localization.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Clinicopathological and imaging factors of surgical margin status and prognosis in breast-conserving therapy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Risk factors for conversion to mastectomy due to positive margins in early breast cancer patients when choosing breast-conserving surgery: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- External validation of a multivariable prediction model for positive resection margins in breast-conserving surgery.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- MRI-based radiomic models to predict surgical margin status and infer tumor immune microenvironment in breast cancer patients with breast-conserving surgery: a multicenter validation study.European radiology · 2024Article
- An intraoperative nomogram for predicting secondary margin positivity in breast conserving surgery utilizing frozen section analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The chances of second surgery due to positive margins in patients receiving breast-conversing surgery (BCS) were about 20-40%. This study aims to develop and validate a nomogram to predict the status of breast-conserving margins. Methods: The database identified patients with core needle biopsy-proven ductal carcinoma Results: The final multivariate regression model was developed as a nomogram, including blood flow signals (OR = 2.88, p = 0.001), grade (OR = 2.46, p = 0.002), microcalcifications (OR = 2.39, p = 0.003), tumor size in ultrasound (OR = 2.12, p = 0.011) and cerbB-2 status (OR = 1.99, p = 0.042). C-indices were calculated of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.64-0.78) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.59-0.78) for the modeling and the validation group, respectively. The calibration of the model was considered adequate in the validation group (p > 0.05). Conclusion: We developed a nomogram that enables the estimation of the preoperative risk of positive BCS margins. Our nomogram provides a valuable tool for identifying high-risk patients who might have to undergo a wider excision.
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.