ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Early Compliance with Commission on Cancer Operative Standards for Breast Cancer Surgery.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. 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.
- Harmonizing intervention, context, and implementation strategies with Context-Driven Co-Design (CD2).Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Bridging Operative Standards to Clinical Practice: A Case Comparison of Synoptic Operative Report Implementation in Breast Cancer Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Implementation of Synoptic Reports in Enhancing Documentation Practices in Pediatric Surgical Oncology: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEfforts to define the key technical elements of breast cancer surgery, the foundation of curative treatment, have been recognized recently by the Commission on Cancer (CoC). Effective 1 January 2023, surgeon documentation in synoptic format of specific technical elements of axillary surgery for breast cancer became a CoC accreditation requirement (standards 5.3 and 5.4).
methodsAfter Institutional Review Board approval, the study identified patients from the authors' prospective breast surgery database granting research consent who underwent axillary surgery for breast cancer from 1 January 2023 to 31 December 2023. Operative reports, which since 2017 have been standardized templates, were reviewed for compliance.
resultsThe study identified 592 eligible patients who had 623 axillary operations (76 % cN0, 24 % cN+). Full compliance with standard 5.3 was met in 71 % of cases and with standard 5.4 in 97 % of cases. Regarding standard 5.3, a mid-year internal review and subsequent individual surgeon-level communication significantly increased full synoptic documentation compliance to 98 % in quarter 4 (p < 0.001). The most common reasons for non-compliance were failure to record a response as "not applicable" regarding tracer use to identify sentinel lymph nodes in the neoadjuvant setting (the most deficient element, 81 % deficient) and failure to record "not applicable" for elements conditional on setting (upfront vs neoadjuvant surgery). Regarding standard 5.4, which has fewer elements overall, none of which are conditional, compliance was high throughout 2023.
conclusionsMid-year audit and individual surgeon-level communication successfully improved compliance with standard 5.3 to meet the required threshold for accreditation. Prior practice adoption of templated operative notes likely facilitated integration of the synoptic standards into surgeon workflow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39523295What 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.