ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2025
Does concomitant ductal carcinoma in situ influence the prognostic outcome after neoadjuvant therapy in triple-negative invasive ductal carcinoma?
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. 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.
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
purposeDuctal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is considered a precursor to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), and the coexistence of DCIS with IDC is often observed during the diagnosis of breast cancer. The aim of study is to investigated the clinicopathological features and prognosis of triple-negative IDC with DCIS following neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). Additionally, we explored the risk factors for residual DCIS in these patients post-NAT.
methodsThis study included patients with stages II-III triple-negative breast cancer with histologically confirmed IDC who underwent radical surgery after NAT between January 2011 and December 2021. Baseline data, clinical features, pathological outcomes, and prognostic information were collected and analyzed.
resultsA total of 315 patients were enrolled and categorized into the IDC + DCIS (n = 67) and IDC groups (n = 248) according to the composition of the pre-NAT biopsy. The proportion of patients with histological grade G3 (78.2% vs. 61.2%, p = 0.004) and a Ki-67 index > 20% (98.4% vs. 86.6%, p < 0.001) was significantly higher in the IDC group than in the IDC + DCIS group. Although no significant difference was observed in the 5-year overall survival (OS) (93.4% vs. 90.8%, p = 0.298) between the two groups, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (90.6% vs. 83.5%, p = 0.041) of the IDC + DCIS group was significantly better than that in the IDC group. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that IDC + DCIS (HR: 0.502; 95% CI, 0.284-0.952; p = 0.048) was an independent prognostic factor for DFS. In addition, the clinical T3-T4 stage (OR = 3.891; 95% CI, 1.320-15.219, p = 0.040) and clinical N1-N3 (OR = 4.500; 95% CI, 1.495-13.564, p = 0.012) were independent preoperative predictors of residual DCIS after NAT in patients with IDC and DCIS components.
conclusionThe presence of DCIS component in patients with triple-negative IDC is associated with lower tumor aggressiveness and improved DFS after NAT compared to patients without DCIS. Additionally, clinical T and N stages are risk factors for residual DCIS after NAT in patients with triple-negative IDC and a DCIS component.
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.