ArticleWorld journal of surgical oncology2025
Is axillary surgery still justified in DCIS diagnosed via vacuum-assisted biopsy?
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
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe role of axillary surgery in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial, particularly for cases diagnosed via vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB), which may reduce "upstage" to invasive disease. This study evaluates the incidence of axillary metastasis and pathologic upstaging in DCIS to identify subgroups where axillary staging can be safely omitted.
methodsA retrospective cohort of 494 patients with pure DCIS diagnosed by VAB (2011-2019) was analyzed. Patients were stratified by age, nuclear grade, comedonecrosis, and surgical approach (breast-conserving surgery [BCS] vs. mastectomy). Axillary management included sentinel node biopsy (SNB), axillary dissection (AD), or omission. Multivariate logistic regression identified predictors of axillary surgery and upstaging to invasive carcinoma.
resultsMost patients underwent BCS (72.7%), with axillary evaluation performed in 35.1% of BCS cases versus 91.9% of mastectomies (p < 0.001). Only 3.8% (19/494) were upstaged to invasive carcinoma, and nodal involvement occurred in 1.2% (3/250) of axillary procedures-all in patients with invasive foci on final pathology. No pure DCIS cases had nodal metastasis. Younger age (< 40 years, p = 0.039), high nuclear grade (grade 3, p = 0.006), and mastectomy (p < 0.001) independently predicted axillary surgery. Comedonecrosis and palpable lesions were associated with higher SNB rates but not nodal positivity.
conclusionsRoutine axillary surgery is unnecessary in VAB-diagnosed DCIS. Omission of SNB appears safe for patients undergoing BCS without high-risk features (palpability, high grade). Axillary staging may be reserved for mastectomy candidates or those with suspicions imaging of invasive disease.
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.