ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2025
Evaluating the risk of underdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer in needle biopsy-diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ eligible for radiofrequency ablation.
Article in World journal of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered a promising alternative to surgical excision for patients with small, unifocal early-stage breast cancer. A significant concern with the application of RFA in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) via needle biopsy is the underdiagnosis of invasive cancer. The extent of this underdiagnosis in DCIS patients eligible for RFA has not been clearly defined.
methodsThis retrospective study assessed lesions diagnosed as DCIS via needle biopsy and eligible for RFA at our institution from April 2009 to March 2024. The eligibility criteria for RFA included a lesion size of ≤ 1.5 cm, unifocality, and clinical node negativity. Underdiagnosis was defined as the presence of invasive cancer in surgical specimens. We evaluated the frequency and risk factors associated with underdiagnosis.
resultsDuring the study period, 606 lesions were diagnosed as DCIS via needle biopsy. Of these, 209 lesions met the criteria for RFA, with underdiagnosis determined in 40 lesions (19.1%). The distribution of pathological T (pT) stages among these lesions was as follows: DCIS in 169 lesions (80.9%), pT1mi in 20 lesions (9.6%), pT1a in 5 lesions (2.4%), pT1b in 9 lesions (4.3%), pT1c in 5 lesions (2.4%), and pT2 in 1 lesion (0.5%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified lesion size ≥ 10 mm as a significant risk factor for underdiagnosis (p = 0.016). Adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemotherapy were administered to 26 (65.0%) and 6 (15.0%) of the underdiagnosed lesions, respectively.
conclusionsOur findings highlight the risk of underdiagnosing invasive breast cancer in patients undergoing RFA for needle biopsy-diagnosed DCIS. It is crucial to acknowledge the potential for undertreatment when considering RFA as a treatment option.
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.