ArticleScientific reports2024
Tailored radiation dose according to margin width for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ after breast-conserving surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reoperation Versus Dose-Escalated Radiotherapy for Ductal CarcinomaJournal of breast cancer · 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
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A 2 mm resection margin is considered adequate for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We assessed the effectiveness of a tailored radiation dose for margins < 2 mm and the appropriate margin width for high-risk DCIS. We retrospectively evaluated 137 patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS between 2013 and 2019. The patients were divided into three- positive, close (< 2 mm), and negative (≥ 2 mm) margin groups. Radiation dose to the tumor bed in equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions were a median of 66.25 Gy, 61.81 Gy, and 59.75 Gy for positive, close, and negative margin groups, respectively. During a median follow-up of 58 months, the crude rates of local recurrence were 15.0%, 6.7%, and 4.6% in the positive, close, and negative margin groups, respectively. The positive margin group had a significantly lower 5-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) rate compared to the close and negative margin groups in propensity-weighted log-rank analysis (84.82%, 93.27%, and 93.20%, respectively; p = 0.008). The difference in 5-year LRFS between patients with the high- and non-high-grade tumors decreased as the margin width increased (80.4% vs. 100.0% for margin ≥ 2 mm, p < 0.001; 92.3% vs. 100.0% for margin ≥ 6 mm, p = 0.123). With the radiation dose tailored for margin widths, positive margins were associated with poorer local control than negative margins, whereas close margins were not. Widely clear margins (≥ 2 mm) were related to favorable local control for high-grade DCIS.
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.