ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Surgery for Classic, Pleomorphic and Non-classic Lobular Carcinoma In Situ: Surgery Rate, Risk of Upstaging and Short-Term Follow-Up.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immediate and ipsilateral recurrence rates and treatment recommendations for patients with pleomorphic and florid lobular carcinoma in situ.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Patients with a Non-classic Lobular Carcinoma In Situ Breast Biopsy.Annals of surgical oncology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Dutch breast cancer guideline recommends surveillance for classic lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), unless there is a discrepancy with mammographic findings, and surgery for pleomorphic and non-classic LCIS.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess adherence to the guideline in daily practice, as well as the surgery rate, risk of upstaging, and events during follow-up.
methodsSelection of patients from a nationwide cohort diagnosed between 2011 and 2020. Patients with a history of in situ or invasive breast cancer or concomitant atypical ductal hyperplasia were excluded. Analyses comprised univariable analysis.
resultsOf 1178 diagnoses, 1018 (86%) were classic LCIS, 129 (11%) were pleomorphic LCIS, and 31 (3%) were non-classic (florid or unspecified non-classic) LCIS. Surgery was performed in 323 patients. The surgery rate for classic LCIS was 19%, 83% for pleomorphic LCIS, and 84% for non-classic LCIS. The upstage rate for both classic and pleomorphic LCIS was 32%, and 31% for non-classic LCIS. LCIS was upstaged in 103 patients (32%); 24 (7%) to DCIS and 79 (25%) to invasive breast cancer. Follow-up of the 859 non-operated patients showed fewer than 4% with ipsilateral DCIS or invasive breast cancer.
conclusionThe surgery rates for classic, pleomorphic, and non-classic LCIS indicate that the guideline is well adhered to in daily practice. Given the high upstage rates and low number of subsequent DCIS and invasive breast cancer events in patients with classic LCIS, these patients appear to be well-selected for surgery versus surveillance. The results support the recommendation to operate on patients with pleomorphic/non-classic LCIS.
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.