ArticleCancers2024
Surgical De-Escalation for Re-Excision in Patients with a Margin Less Than 2 mm and a Diagnosis of DCIS.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of re-excision on local recurrence in patients with involved or close margins after upfront breast-conserving surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Impact of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography on Personalized Surgical Decision-Making in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Multicentre Pilot Observational Cohort Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- The Use of ChatGPT-4.0 to Simplify Breast Pathology Reports: A Study on Readability and Accuracy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Critical appraisal of the 2 mm threshold in ductal carcinoma in situ: methodological concerns in meta-analysis of margin width and local recurrence risk.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Extensive Intraductal Component (EIC) as the Most Predictive Factor for Residual Disease Post-Breast-Conserving Surgery With Close DCIS Margins: A Single Institutional Experience.International journal of breast cancer · 2025Article
- Impact of cavity shave margins in patients with ductal carcinomaFrontiers in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current surgical guidelines recommend an optimal margin width of 2 mm for the management of patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). However, there are still many controversies regarding re-excision when the optimal margin criteria are not met in the first resection. The purpose of this study is to understand the importance of surgical margin width, re-excision, and treatments to avoid additional surgery on locoregional recurrence (LRR). The study is retrospective and analyzed surgical margins, adjuvant treatments, re-excision, and LRR in patients with DCIS who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS). A total of 197 patients were enrolled. Re-operation for a close margin rate was 13.5%, and the 3-year recurrence was 7.6%. No difference in the LRR was reported among the patients subjected to BCS regardless of the margin width (
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.