ArticleBreast care (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Does Routine Follow-Up after Patients Have Completed Adjuvant Therapy for Early-Stage Breast Cancer at a Cancer Center Improve Prognosis?
Article in Breast care (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to assess whether follow-up of patients with operative breast cancer at cancer centres (CCs) improved prognosis compared with follow-up by family physicians (FPs). Methods: The study included 254 patients who relapsed within 7 years from the first postoperative period. The patients were divided into two groups according to the follow-up facility: the CC and FP groups (the follow-up of patients was structured in the same way between FPs and CCs). There are 146 and 108 cases of recurrence in the CC and FP groups, respectively. The analysis targets of the two groups were determined using the propensity matching method based on the following 7 factors: oestrogen receptor status, progesterone receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, St. Gallen category, menopausal status, surgical procedure, and receipt of postoperative chemotherapy at the time of surgery. Overall survival (OS) in both groups was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Results: Overall, 97 patients each in the CC and FP groups who relapsed were analysed using the propensity matching method. The median recurrence-free survival periods were 1,676 and 994 days in the FP and CC groups, respectively, and were significantly longer in the FP group. However, the median OS starting from the day of surgery was 3,424 and 2,794 days in the FP and CC groups, respectively, with no significant difference. Conclusion: This study revealed that regular follow-up at CCs did not improve survival compared with regular follow-up by FPs.
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.