ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2025
Clinicopathologic characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ and risk of subsequent invasive breast cancer: a multicenter, population-based cohort study.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Level Mass Findings on Mammography and Ultrasonography in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Association with Invasive Carcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Transcriptome predictors of second breast events in ductal carcinoma in situ: a case‒control study including Black and White women.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- A Clinical and Pathological Analysis of Seven Cases of Salivary Gland Ductal Carcinoma.Cureus · 2026Article
- Breaking new ground in ductal carcinoma in situ management: the promise of intratumoral messenger ribonucleic acid-2752 and pembrolizumab.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Article
- p16, COX-2, and Ki67 Protein Expression in DCIS and Risk of Ipsilateral Invasive Breast Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo study the association between clinicopathologic characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and risk of subsequent invasive breast cancer (IBC).
methodsWe conducted a case-control study nested in a multicenter, population-based cohort of 8175 women aged ≥ 18 years with DCIS diagnosed between 1987 and 2016 and followed for a median duration of 83 months. Cases (n = 497) were women with a first diagnosis of DCIS who developed a subsequent IBC ≥ 6 months later; controls (2/case; n = 959) were matched to cases on age at and calendar year of DCIS diagnosis. Univariable and multivariable conditional logistic regression models were used to examine the associations between the DCIS characteristics of interest (non-screen detection of DCIS, tumor size, positive margins, grade of DCIS, necrosis, architectural pattern, microcalcification, and estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status) and risk of IBC.
resultsIn the total study population, the associations were largely null. In subgroup analyses, there were strong position associations with punctate necrosis (pre/perimenopausal women), detection by physical exam (postmenopausal women), architectural patterns other than the main types (breast-conserving surgery [BCS]), and DCIS margins (ipsilateral cases), and inverse associations with HER2 positivity (BCS) and microcalcification (mastectomy); however, the associated confidence intervals were mostly very wide.
conclusionThe results of this study provide limited support for associations of the DCIS clinicopathologic characteristics studied here and risk of IBC.
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.