ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Surgical Choice among Women with a First Breast Cancer and Pathogenic Variants in Breast Cancer Genes.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 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.
- Preoperative Germline Genetic Testing and Surgical Timing in Breast Cancer: Implementation of National Reimbursement Programs: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Frequency of bilateral prophylactic and contra-lateral risk-reducing mastectomies in women with germline PALB2 variants.Familial cancer · 2026Review
- Bilateral Primary Breast Cancer: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Review
- Metachronous triple primary malignancies of duodenum, skin, and appendix in the absence of common hereditary syndromes: a case report.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Sequential triple primary malignancies in the larynx, lung, and liver with discordant p53 expression patterns: a case report.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient choice regarding risk-reducing mastectomy in the setting of a new breast cancer diagnosis is not well documented. The objective of this study was to evaluate patterns in surgical treatment choices among women with a first breast cancer diagnosis and a breast cancer susceptibility gene mutation.
methodsWe conducted a single-center, retrospective analysis of women with unilateral, stage 0-III breast cancer and a high (BRCA1/2, PALB2, PTEN, STK11, TP53) or moderate (ATM, BARD1, CHEK2, RAD51C/D) penetrance gene mutation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM).
resultsOf the 132 patients included, 52% had BRCA1/2 mutations, 8% had other high penetrance mutations, and 40% had moderate penetrance mutations. Most underwent bilateral mastectomy (80%), followed by lumpectomy (15%). Women who underwent CRRM were younger and more likely to be non-smokers (p < 0.001). CRRM rates differed significantly across genes: BRCA1 (90%), ATM (89%), BRCA2 (84%), CHEK2 (67%), PALB2 (63%) [p = 0.048]. Women with moderate penetrance mutations were significantly less likely to undergo CRRM than BRCA1/2 carriers (odds ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.69; p = 0.011)
conclusionsIn this cohort of women with a first breast cancer and pathogenic or likely pathogenic gene variants, we identified differing rates of CRRM across high and moderate penetrance gene mutations. While the odds of CRRM receipt were significantly lower for those with moderate penetrance mutations compared with those with BRCA1/2 mutations, the high uptake of CRRM in CHEK2 and ATM carriers is noteworthy given the lack of consensus regarding surgical management options for women with non-BRCA mutations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40717162What 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.