ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2023
Benefits versus drawbacks of delaying surgery due to additional consultations in older patients with breast cancer.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Concentration and Specialty Pair Patterns of Interdepartmental Consultations in Hospitalized Patients Using Real-World Data: Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Second Opinion Referrals of Cancer Patients in Japan-A Nationwide Study.Cancer science · 2025Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Cancer Tissue In Vitro after PDT Therapy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Benefits versus drawbacks of delaying surgery due to additional consultations in older patients with breast cancer.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdditional evaluations, including second opinions, before breast cancer surgery may improve care, but may cause detrimental treatment delays that could allow disease progression.
aimsWe investigate the timing of surgical delays that are associated with survival benefits conferred by preoperative encounters versus the timing that are associated with potential harm. METHODS AND
resultsWe investigated survival outcomes of SEER Medicare patients with stage 1-3 breast cancer using propensity score-based weighting. We examined interactions between the number of preoperative evaluation components and time from biopsy to definitive surgery. Components include new patient visits, unique surgeons, medical oncologists, or radiation oncologists consulted, established patient encounters, biopsies, and imaging studies. We identified 116 050 cases of whom 99% were female and had an average age of 75.0 (SD = 6.2). We found that new patient visits have a protective association with respect to breast cancer mortality if they occur quickly after diagnosis with breast cancer mortality subdistribution Hazard Ratios [sHRs] = 0.87 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.76-1.00) for 2, 0.71 (CI 0.55-0.92) for 3, and 0.63 (CI 0.37-1.07) for 4+ visits at minimal delay. New patient visits predict worsened mortality compared with no visits if the surgical delay is greater than 33 days (CI 14-53) for 2, 33 days (CI 17-49) for 3, and 44 days (CI 12-75) for 4+. Medical oncologist visits predict worse outcomes if the surgical delay is greater than 29 days (CI 20-39) for 1 and 38 days (CI 12-65) for 2+ visits. Similarly, surgeon encounters switch from a positive to a negative association if the surgical delay exceeds 29 days (CI 17-41) for 1 visit, but the positive estimate persists over time for 3+ surgeon visits.
conclusionPreoperative visits that cause substantial delays may be associated with increased mortality in older patients with breast cancer.
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.