Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35876923›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2022

Does Breast-Conserving Surgery with Radiotherapy have a Better Survival than Mastectomy? A Meta-Analysis of More than 1,500,000 Patients.

Gabriel De la Cruz Ku, Manish Karamchandani, Diego Chambergo-Michilot, Alexis R Narvaez-Rojas, Michael Jonczyk, Fortunato S Príncipe-Meneses, David Posawatz, Salvatore Nardello, Abhishek Chatterjee

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Ultrasound-guided microwave ablation for breast tumors: current status and future perspectives.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2026
    Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Gabriel De la Cruz KuDepartment of General Surgery, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, MA, USA.
Manish KaramchandaniDepartment of General Surgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Diego Chambergo-MichilotUniversidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru.
Alexis R Narvaez-RojasUniversidad Nacional Autonoma de Nicaragua, Nicaragua, USA.
Michael JonczykLahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA, USA.
Fortunato S Príncipe-MenesesUniversidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas, Lima, Peru.
David PosawatzDepartment of General Surgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Salvatore NardelloDivision of Surgical Oncology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Abhishek ChatterjeeDivision of Surgical Oncology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. Achatterjee1@tuftsmedicalcenter.org.
Tufts Medical Center · USLahey Medical Center · USNational Autonomous University of Nicaragua · NIPeruvian University of Applied Sciences · PEUniversidad Científica del Sur · PEUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere have been conflicting studies reporting on survival advantages between breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS) in comparison with mastectomy. Our aim was to compare the efficacy of BCS and mastectomy in terms of overall survival (OS) comparing all past published studies.

methodsWe performed a comprehensive review of literature through October 2021 in PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE. The studies included were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohorts that compare BCS versus mastectomy. We excluded studies that included male sex, stage 0, distant metastasis at diagnosis, bilateral synchronous cancer, neoadjuvant radiation/chemotherapy, and articles with incomplete data. We performed a meta-analysis following the random-effect model with the inverse variance method.

resultsFrom 18,997 publications, a total of 30 studies were included in the final analysis: 6 studies were randomized trials, and 24 were retrospective cohorts. A total of 1,802,128 patients with a follow-up ranging from 4 to 20 years were included, and 1,075,563 and 744,565 underwent BCS and mastectomy, respectively. Among the population, BCS is associated with improved OS compared with mastectomy [relative risk (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.74]. This effect was similar when analysis was performed in cohorts and multi-institutional databases (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.49-0.67). Furthermore, the benefit of BCS was stronger in patients who had less than 10 years of follow-up (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.46-0.64).

conclusionsPatients who underwent BCS had better OS compared with mastectomy. Such results depicting survival advantage, especially using such a large sample of patients, may need to be included in the shared surgical decision making when discussing breast cancer treatment with patients.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsMastectomy, SegmentalFemaleHumansMastectomyNeoadjuvant TherapyRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID35876923
OpenAlexW4287377982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.