ArticleCancer medicine2024
Unveiling the Clinical Path of Microinvasive Breast Cancer: A Comparative Study With Tis-T1 Breast Cancer.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Predictors and nomogram for upstaging to invasive breast carcinoma in ductal carcinomaGland surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe prognosis of microinvasive breast cancer (MIBC) is controversial, with a high reported rate of local recurrence (LR). This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics, treatments, and prognosis of patients with MIBC compared to those with carcinoma in situ (CIS) or early invasive cancer.
methodsPatients who diagnosed with CIS or stage I breast cancer were retrospectively enrolled. Using the Kaplan-Meier method, local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), systemic recurrence-free survival (SRFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared according to T stage. The prognostic factors associated with LRFS were identified using the Cox proportional hazards model.
resultsAccording to T stage, 517 (21.6%), 200 (8.4%), 207 (8.7%), 363 (15.2%), and 1101 (46.1%) patients had Tis, T1mi, T1a, T1b, and T1c tumors, respectively. The proportion of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive tumors was significantly higher in patients with MIBC (p < 0.0001). The administered adjuvant treatments also showed differences according to T stage (p < 0.0001). During the 73-month median follow-up period, patients with MIBC showed significantly worse LRFS than those with T1a or T1c tumors (p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in SRFS and CSS. In the Cox regression analysis, tumor multiplicity (p = 0.017), Ki-67 (p = 0.025), cancer subtype (p = 0.034), adjuvant endocrine therapy (p = 0.003), and adjuvant radiation therapy (p < 0.0001) were significant prognostic factors associated with LRFS.
conclusionThe risk of LR was higher in patients with MIBC than in those with small invasive breast cancer. Therefore, if indicated, adjuvant endocrine and radiation therapies should be administered to prevent undertreatment in patients with MIBC.
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.