ArticleBMC cancer2025
Impact of neoadjuvant systemic therapy on surgical and radiotherapy outcomes in patients with early-stage breast cancer: a cross-sectional retrospective single-center study.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
introductionNeoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) may cause non-concentric tumor shrinkage, complicating excision volume definition and potentially increasing radiotherapy boost volumes, affecting cosmetic outcomes. This study aims to compare excision and boost volumes in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) after NST versus no-NST, and assesses associations with quality of life (QoL) and cosmetic outcomes.
methodsWomen who underwent BCS for invasive breast cancer at Amsterdam UMC (January 2016-March 2023) were included. Data were retrieved from records, and cross-sectional QoL and cosmetic outcomes were assessed using EORTC-QLQ-C30, -BR23, HADS and BREAST-Q questionnaires. Descriptive statistics were stratified by NST use, with sensitivity analyses for robustness. Excess healthy tissue removal was defined by the calculated resection ratio (CRR) (derived from excision volume and tumor diameter).
resultsAmong 403 patients, 136 (33.7%) received NST. Median pathological (postoperative) tumor size was smaller in the NST group (7 mm vs. 14 mm, p < 0.001). NST was associated with smaller total resection volumes (TRVs) in patients with cT2 (35 cm3 vs. 53 cm3, p = 0.005), and HER2-positive tumors (20 cm3 vs. 79 cm3, p = 0.048). CCRs were higher (2.2 vs. 1.6, p < 0.002), and radiotherapy boost volume were lower (55 cm3 vs. 91 cm3, p = 0.009) following NST. Additionally, fewer patients in the NST group reported acute breast pain (16% vs. 20%, p = 0.029). Breast satisfaction scores according to the Breast-Q were 9 points higher in the NST group, although not statistically significant (p = 0.157).
conclusionNST reduced TRVs in cT2 and HER2-positive tumors, and decreased radiotherapy boost volumes in all patients. However, it was also associated with increased removal of healthy breast tissue. Despite this, NST as associated with less acute breast pain and clinically meaningful improvements in breast satisfaction. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.