Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36130770›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2022

Margin status and survival outcomes after breast cancer conservation surgery: prospectively registered systematic review and meta-analysis.

James R Bundred, Sarah Michael, Beth Stuart, Ramsey I Cutress, Kerri Beckmann, Bernd Holleczek, Jane E Dahlstrom, Jacqui Gath, David Dodwell, Nigel J Bundred

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05732064 (Effects of Low-dose Dexmedetomidine-esketamine Combined Nasal Administration at Night on Perioperative Sleep Quality in Breast Cancer Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 89 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 6 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.

NCT05732064 phase4completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Low-dose Dexmedetomidine-esketamine Combined Nasal Administration at Night on Perioperative Sleep Quality in Breast Cancer Patients: a Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorPeking University First HospitalRan2023 to 2025Enrolled180ConditionsBreast Cancer, Perioperative Period, Dexmedetomidine, EsketamineArmsDexmedetomidine, Esketamine, Normal saline
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

89 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Endoscopy‑assisted breast‑conserving treatment: the first Polish review of 30 patients.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Materials today. Bio · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

29 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

10 authors at 9 institutions in 3 countries.

James R BundredLeeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK Bundredn@manchester.ac.uk.
Sarah MichaelManchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, UK.
Beth StuartCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Ramsey I CutressCancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Kerri BeckmannCancer Epidemiology and Population Health Research Group, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Bernd HolleczekDivision of Clinical Epidemiology Aging Research, German Cancer Research Centre (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Jane E DahlstromACT Pathology, Canberra Health Services and Australian National University Medical School, ACT, Australia.
Jacqui GathIndependent Cancer Patients' Voice, London, UK.
David DodwellNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Nigel J BundredManchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Wythenshawe, Manchester, UK Bundredn@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6007-056X
University of Manchester · GBAustralian National University · AUGerman Cancer Research Center · DEThe Patients Association · GBUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Leeds · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Southampton · GBUniversity of South Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine if margin involvement is associated with distant recurrence and to determine the required margin to minimise both local recurrence and distant recurrence in early stage invasive breast cancer.

designProspectively registered systematic review and meta-analysis of literature. DATA SOURCES: Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Proquest online databases. Unpublished data were sought from study authors. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible studies reported on patients undergoing breast conserving surgery (for stages I-III breast cancer), allowed an estimation of outcomes in relation to margin status, and followed up patients for a minimum of 60 months. Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ only or treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or by mastectomy were excluded. Where applicable, margins were categorised as tumour on ink (involved), close margins (no tumour on ink but <2 mm), and negative margins (≥2 mm).

results68 studies from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2021, comprising 112 140 patients with breast cancer, were included. Across all studies, 9.4% (95% confidence interval 6.8% to 12.8%) of patients had involved (tumour on ink) margins and 17.8% (13.0% to 23.9%) had tumour on ink or a close margin. The rate of distant recurrence was 25.4% (14.5% to 40.6%) in patients with tumour on ink, 8.4% (4.4% to 15.5%) in patients with tumour on ink or close, and 7.4% (3.9% to 13.6%) in patients with negative margins. Compared with negative margins, tumour on ink margins were associated with increased distant recurrence (hazard ratio 2.10, 95% confidence interval 1.65 to 2.69, P<0.001) and local recurrence (1.98, 1.66 to 2.36, P<0.001). Close margins were associated with increased distant recurrence (1.38, 1.13 to 1.69, P<0.001) and local recurrence (2.09, 1.39 to 3.13, P<0.001) compared with negative margins, after adjusting for receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In five studies published since 2010, tumour on ink margins were associated with increased distant recurrence (2.41, 1.81 to 3.21, P<0.001) as were tumour on ink and close margins (1.44, 1.22 to 1.71, P<0.001) compared with negative margins.

conclusionsInvolved or close pathological margins after breast conserving surgery for early stage, invasive breast cancer are associated with increased distant recurrence and local recurrence. Surgeons should aim to achieve a minimum clear margin of at least 1 mm. On the basis of current evidence, international guidelines should be revised. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42021232115.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsBreastFemaleHumansMargins of ExcisionMastectomyMastectomy, SegmentalNeoplasm Recurrence, Local

Identifiers

PMID36130770
PMCPMC9490551
OpenAlexW4296710639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.