ArticleNPJ breast cancer2024
Survival outcomes after omission of surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ.
Article in NPJ breast cancer, 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.
- Trends in Nonsurgical Management for Low-Risk, Hormone Receptor-Positive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Semaphorin-7A promotes macrophage-mediated mammary epithelial and ductal carcinoma in situ invasion.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- Cancer outcomes in women without upfront surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ: observational cohort study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical trials of active surveillance (AS) for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS) are underway. We sought to understand the historical management of biologically favorable DCIS and to determine the outcomes of patients who did not have immediate surgery. Using data from the NCDB from 2004 to 2017, the selected cohort included women >40 years of age, with low or intermediate grade and hormone receptor (HR) positive DCIS. AS was defined as either no surgery or surgery >12 months from diagnosis. Women in the AS group were compared to women who had immediate surgery. A Cochran-Armitage test was used to assess the trend of AS over year of diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier curves were estimated to compare overall survival (OS), stratified by age (<50, 50-64, ≥65), and Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the effects of prognostic factors on survival distributions. 74,367 women met study inclusion criteria; 2384 (3.2%) were treated with AS. The proportion of patients in the AS cohort increased yearly, peaking in 2017 at 4.2% (p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, increasing age (OR 1.02, p < 0.01), black race (OR 1.7, p < 0.001), and being uninsured (OR 2.2, p < 0.001) were associated with increased likelihood of AS. In women <50 years of age, OS outcomes were similar, with 10-year OS of 97.4% in the immediate surgery cohort versus 99.1% in AS cohort (p = 0.43). The proportion of patients with DCIS treated with AS has remained small but is increasing over time. AS of biologically favorable DCIS in younger, healthier women is not associated with adverse survival.
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.