ArticleBreast care (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Primary Breast Sarcoma: A Two-Centre Analysis and Review of Literature.
Article in Breast care (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Primary Breast Sarcoma: A Case Report at Kuwait Cancer Center and Review of the Literature.Cureus · 2026Article
- Diagnostic challenges in poorly differentiated primary synovial sarcoma of the breast.Discover oncology · 2026Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Primary breast sarcoma is a very rare malignant type of breast tumours with an incidence of 0.1% of all primary breast malignancies. Methods: We present a retrospective analysis of the case series from two hospitals in the Czech Republic with a review of the diagnostic and treatment approach to primary breast sarcomas with an analysis of published prognostic factors. Results: Eleven patients were included in the study, 9 women and 2 men. Statistical evaluation revealed that tumour size ( Conclusion: The analysis did not prove any of the factors, such as age, tumour size, grade, or mitotic activity, to be statistically significant prognostic factors. Based on the literature review, the most common published prognostic factors are tumour size, margin status, and grade, but the results are ambiguous.
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.