ArticleThe British journal of radiology2024
Acceptance and results of cryoablation for the treatment of early breast cancer in non-surgical patients.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging advances in non-surgical ablation for early-stage breast cancer.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Cryotherapy as a Surgical De-Escalation Strategy in Breast Cancer: Techniques, Complications, and Oncological Outcomes.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Cryoablation for breast cancer: a narrative review of advances, clinical applications, and future challenges.Translational cancer research · 2025Review
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
objectivesEvaluate acceptance of percutaneous cryoablation (PCA) treatment by patients with early breast cancer (BC) who choose not to have surgery and present our experience in the use of PCA for the local control of BC in this group of patients.
methodsAll biopsy-proven early BC diagnosed in our institution as non-surgical patients between January 2020 and December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. We recorded if PCA was offered and if it was accepted by the patient. PCA was performed under ultrasound (US) guidance, using a liquid nitrogen-based system. Mammography and US or contrast-enhanced mammography follow-up was scheduled every 6 months for 5 years. Patient's tolerance to the procedure, adverse effects, and results regarding local control of the disease were assessed.
resultsA total of 66 early BC were diagnosed in 63 patients who decided not to have surgery. Median age was 88 years (range 60-99 years). Forty-three (95.6%) of the 45 patients offered PCA accepted. Thirty-nine malignant tumours (median size 24 mm) underwent PCA. All cases were previously reviewed in a multidisciplinary tumour board. Complete tumour necrosis was achieved in 81.3% of the cases followed for ≥ 6 months. After a median follow-up of 16 months, the complete ablation rate in Luminal BC ≤ 25 mm was 100%. No major complications were seen.
conclusionsNon-surgical patients with early BC accepted PCA when the treatment was offered. PCA is safe, effective, and well-tolerated outpatient procedure. The study outcomes suggest that PCA could be an alternative to surgery for the management of BC in this group of patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Patients with early BC who choose not to have surgery accept PCA. This percutaneous approach probably allows local control of early BC, mainly in ≤25 mm Luminal tumours.
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.