Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36976360›Full record

ReviewRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2023

[Breast-like cancer of unknown primary : Implications for radiological diagnostics].

Andreas Schneeweiss, Lars Buschhorn

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andreas SchneeweissSektion für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen (NCT), Heidelberg, Deutschland. Andreas.schneeweiss@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Lars BuschhornSektion für Gynäkologische Onkologie, Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen (NCT), Heidelberg, Deutschland. lars.buschhorn@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
National Center for Tumor Diseases · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer of unknown primary (CUP) is defined by the presence of metastatic disease with an undetectable primary tumor at the time of presentation despite standard-of-care imaging. Although the prognosis of most CUP patients is poor, certain subgroups with more favorable prognosis have been defined. DIAGNOSTICS: Women with isolated axillary lymph node metastases and confirmed histologic adenocarcinoma or poorly differentiated subtype, no other distant metastases, and no evidence of a primary cancer including primary breast carcinoma evaluated by clinical examination, computed tomography of thorax and abdomen, mammography, breast ultrasound, and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) represent a potentially curable subgroup of patients with CUP. Breast MRI is the most important radiological modality in the diagnostic workup of breast-like CUP to exclude a primary cancer in the breast. THERAPY: Breast-like CUP patients are treated according to guidelines for patients with node-positive breast cancer. Standard-of-care adjuvant systemic therapy should be given. Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is indicated. If no primary cancer in the breast is detected, surgery of the ipsilateral breast should not be performed. Radiotherapy of the ipsilateral breast and supra-/infraclavicular lymph nodes should be discussed.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsNeoplasms, Unknown PrimaryBreastFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMammographyAxillaMagnetic resonance imagingNeoplasmsOccult primary breast cancerPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID36976360
OpenAlexW4361187857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.