ArticleJournal of breast cancer2024
Intensive Surveillance for Women With Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Study in Korea.
Article in Journal of breast cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the effectiveness of different surveillance intensities on morbidity and mortality in women with breast cancer.
methodsThis retrospective study included patients who had undergone breast cancer surgery in the Republic of Korea between 2009 and 2011. The patients were divided into two groups based on the intensity of their postsurgical surveillance: intensive surveillance group (ISG) and less-intensive surveillance group. Surveillance intensity was measured based on the frequency and type of follow-up diagnostic tests conducted, including mammography, ultrasonography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, bone scans, and positron emission tomography scans.
resultsWe included 1,356 patients with a median follow-up period of 121.2 months (range, 12.8-168.0 months). The analysis revealed no significant difference in the overall survival (OS) between the two groups within five years of surgery. However, patients with ISG exhibited significantly better breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) within the same period. Five years after surgery, the differences in survival outcomes between the groups were not statistically significant.
conclusionIntensive surveillance did not demonstrate a significant improvement in OS for patients with breast cancer beyond five years postoperatively. However, within the first five years, intensive surveillance was associated with better BCSS and DMFS. These findings suggest that personalized surveillance strategies may benefit specific patient subsets, particularly in the early years after treatment. Further nationwide randomized studies are warranted to refine surveillance guidelines and optimize outcomes in patients with breast cancer.
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.