ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2022
Survival Comparisons between Breast Conservation Surgery and Mastectomy Followed by Postoperative Radiotherapy in Stage I-III Breast Cancer Patients: Analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (Seer) Program Database.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- 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
- The effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on M0 adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: a retrospective cohort study based on SEER data.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Establishment and validation survival prediction models for T1 locally advanced breast cancer after breast conservation surgery versus mastectomy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- 15-Year Survival Outcome of Primary Breast Conservation Therapy in Young Women with Breast Cancer.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- JCAD-Derived from Plasma Exosomes: Promoting Tumor Cell Progression and Predicting Poor Outcomes in Breast Cancer.International journal of biological sciences · 2025Article
- Are Current Survival Prediction Tools Useful When Treating Subsequent Skeletal-related Events From Bone Metastases?Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2024Article
- Molecular subtypes of breast cancer predicting clinical benefits of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery: a propensity-score-matched cohort study.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2023Article
- Surgical options for patients with early-stage breast cancer and pathogenic germline variants: an oncologist perspectives.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Pathologic Response of Associated Ductal Carcinoma In Situ to Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2022Review
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
Background: This study aims to evaluate the overall and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy (RT) compared with mastectomy plus RT in resectable breast cancer. Moreover, the aim is to also identify the subgroups who benefit from BCS plus RT and establish a predictive nomogram for stage II patients. Methods: Stage I−III breast cancer patients were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 1990 and 2016. Patients with available clinical information were split into two groups: BCS plus RT and mastectomy plus RT. Kaplan−Meier survival analysis, univariate and multivariate regression analysis, and propensity score matching were used in the study. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated based on stratified Cox univariate regression analyses. A prognostic nomogram by multivariable Cox regression model was developed for stage II patients, and consistency index (C-index) and calibration curve were used to evaluate the accuracy of the nomogram in the training and validation set. Results: A total of 24,590 eligible patients were enrolled. The difference in overall survival (OS) and BCSS remained significant in stage II patients both before and after PSM (after PSM: OS: HR = 0.8536, p = 0.0115; BCSS: HR = 0.7803, p = 0.0013). In stage II patients, the survival advantage effect of BCS plus RT on OS and BCSS was observed in the following subgroups: any age, smaller tumor size (<1 cm), stage IIA (T2N0, T0−1N1), ER (+), and any PR status. Secondly, the C-indexes for BCSS prediction was 0.714 (95% CI 0.694−0.734). The calibration curves showed perfect agreement in both the training and validation sets. Conclusions: BCS plus RT significantly improved the survival rates for patients of stage IIA (T2N0, T0−1N1), ER (+). For stage II patients, the nomogram was a good predictor of 5-, 10-, and 15-year BCSS. Our study may help guide treatment decisions and prolong the survival of stage II breast cancer patients.
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.