Reply on "Prognosis according to the timing of recurrence in breast cancer" (Ann Surg Treat Res 2023;104:1-9).

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Machine learning-based integration develops relapse related signature for predicting prognosis and indicating immune microenvironment infiltration in breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2025
   Article
2. Assessing the recurrence rate in locally advanced Luminal A patients compared to triple-negative patients in Shahid Rahimi Hospital Khorramabad in 2022: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025
   Article
3. Challenges in managing recurrent luminal A breast cancer: a case study.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.