ArticleThe breast journal2022
Survival Outcomes of Breast-Conserving Therapy versus Mastectomy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer, Including Centrally Located Breast Cancer: A SEER-Based Study.
Article in The breast journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Oncoplastic Breast Surgery Taking "Center" Stage-Managing Centrally Located Breast Tumors in Indian Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Clinical outcomes of breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy in early-stage breast cancer: A retrospective cohort study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Breast-conserving surgery is an appropriate procedure for centrally located breast cancer: a population-based retrospective cohort study.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- Centrally located breast carcinomas treated with central quadrantectomy and immediate nipple-areola reconstruction: a cohort study.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to analyze the survival outcomes of breast cancer (BC) patients, especially centrally located breast cancer (CLBC) patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy. Methods: Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) data of patients with T1-T2 invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer receiving BCT or mastectomy were reviewed. We used X-tile software to convert continuous variables to categorical variables. Chi-square tests were utilized to compare baseline information. The multivariate logistic regression model was performed to evaluate the relationship between predictive variables and treatment choice. Survival outcomes were visualized by Kaplan-Meier curves and cumulative incidence function curves and compared using multivariate analyses, including the Cox proportional hazards model and competing risks model. Propensity score matching was performed to alleviate the effects of baseline differences on survival outcomes. Result: A total of 180,495 patients were enrolled in this study. The breast preservation rates fluctuated around 60% from 2000 to 2015. Clinical features including invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), lower histologic grade, smaller tumor size, fewer lymph node metastases, positive ER and PR status, and chemotherapy use were independently correlated with BCT in both BC and CLBC cohorts. In all the classic Cox models and competing risks models, BCT was an independent favorable prognostic factor for BC, including CLBC patients in most subgroups. In addition, despite the low breast-conserving rate compared with tumors located in the other areas, CLBC did not impair the prognosis of BCT patients. Conclusion: BCT is optional and preferable for most early-stage BC, including CLBC 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.