ArticleCancer medicine2024
Trends and efficacy of omitting axillary lymph node dissection in early-stage male breast cancer with limited nodal involvement: A population-based cohort study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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.
- Current Perspectives on Non-Metastatic Male Breast Cancer: Genetics, Biology, and Treatment Advances: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Treatments of Interest in Male Breast Cancer: An Umbrella Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Trends and efficacy of omitting axillary lymph node dissection in early-stage male breast cancer with limited nodal involvement: A population-based cohort study.Cancer medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in managing early-stage male breast cancer (MBC) patients with T1-2 tumors and limited lymph node metastasis, all receiving radiotherapy, remains uncertain. This study examines trends and survival outcomes for SLNB and ALND in the United States.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data from 2010 to 2020 for MBC patients with T1-2 tumors and 1-2 positive lymph nodes undergoing radiotherapy. Patients were classified by nodes removed (SLNB ≤5, ALND ≥10), comparing overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) between the groups before and after propensity score matching.
resultsOf 299 MBC patients analyzed, SLNB usage increased from 18.8% in 2010 to 61.0% in 2020. Multivariable logistic regression highlighted significant associations of SLNB use with diagnosis year, race, surgery type, positive lymph node count, and metastasis size. No significant differences in 5-year OS (77.98% SLNB vs. 85.85% ALND, p = 0.337) or BCSS (91.54% SLNB vs. 94.97% ALND, p = 0.214) were observed. Propensity score matching (96 patients per group) confirmed similar 5-year OS (83.9% for SLNB vs. 82.0% for ALND, p = 0.925) and BCSS (90.1% for SLNB vs. 96.9% for ALND, p = 0.167).
conclusionSLNB and ALND provide comparable survival outcomes in early-stage MBC patients with limited lymph node metastasis undergoing radiotherapy. The increased utilization of SLNB supports its consideration to reduce surgical morbidity in selected MBC patients despite limited direct evidence.
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.