ArticleCancer diagnosis & prognosis
Staging for Breast Cancer: A Comparison Between Old and New Approaches.
Article in Cancer diagnosis & prognosis. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Can Ki-67 serve as a suitable marker to indicate the necessity of staging diagnostics in cases of low-risk breast cancer?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aim: Staging for breast cancer in advanced stages or prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is recommended to be performed with CT scan of the chest and abdomen and a bone scan. This recommendation is valid since 2012, when conventional staging with chest x-ray and ultrasound of the abdomen was replaced by the more sensitive CT scan. However, it remains unclear if this approach improves patient outcome and prognosis. Patients and Methods: We identified patients who were treated for breast cancer at the breast center of the St. Elisabeth Hospital, Cologne, in 2012 and 2014. Clinical information such as age at diagnosis, stage, tumor biology, grading, and the applied method for staging was abstracted from the patient chart. We also looked for local or distant recurrence and data of survival. Results: A total of 1,122 patients were identified. Of those, 104 patients developed local or distant recurrence and 54 died. Conventional staging with chest x-ray, abdominal ultrasound and a bone scan was more often in 2012 (482 cases) than in 2014 (135), but CT-staging was more often in 2014 (180 vs. 29 cases). In general, less patients were staged in 2014 than in 2012. There were no significant survival differences between the two groups. Conclusion: Staging habits changed in 2012 compared to 2014 according to the changes in guidelines. This change did not affect disease-free survival.
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.