ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Impact of Second Opinions on Time to Treatment of Breast Cancer.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeted Multidisciplinary Continuous Improvement Process Reduces Time to Breast Cancer Surgery with Immediate Reconstruction.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Within-Region Versus Out-of-Region Cancer Care: Healthcare Patterns and Clinical Outcomes in South Korea.Cancers · 2026Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Reassuring Timeliness in the Era of Second Opinions.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Commission on Cancer (CoC) advocates that upfront breast surgery is performed within 60 days of diagnosis of stage I-III breast cancer, but it is unknown whether patients seeking a second opinion at an outside institution experience increased delays in time to first treatment (TTT). This study compares TTT between externally diagnosed patients (EDP) and internally diagnosed patients (IDP) with breast cancer.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included patients with stage 0-III breast cancer treated at a single institution between January and July 2024. Patient demographics, date of multidisciplinary consultations, number of additional imaging tests and biopsies performed, and treatment information were reviewed. Two different TTT were calculated: time from biopsy to treatment and time from first surgical oncology clinic appointment at our institution to treatment (TCT).
resultsA total of 226 patients (113 IDP, 113 EDP) were included. Median TCT was 21 days (IQR 12, 29 days) with no difference between EDP and IDP (20 vs. 21 days, p = 0.6594). EDP required additional imaging and biopsies more frequently than IDP (88.5% vs. 65.5%, p < 0.001). Additional workup and breast surgery with concurrent reconstruction increased median TCT (11 vs. 22 days, p < 0.0001, and 20 vs. 26 days, p = 0.0007, respectively).
conclusionsObtaining a second opinion increased the overall time from diagnosis to treatment but remained within the CoC standard. There was no difference in TCT between EDP and IDP once initiating care at our institution. Patients should not be discouraged from obtaining a second opinion on the basis of concerns about time to treatment.
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.