ArticleJournal of breast cancer2026
Correlation Between Margin Status and Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence in Patients With Breast Cancer Undergoing Breast-Conserving Surgery With Whole-Breast Radiation Therapy.
Article in Journal of breast cancer, 2026. 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBreast-conserving surgery (BCS) with whole-breast radiation therapy is the standard treatment for invasive breast cancer, with surgical margin status crucial for minimizing ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). This study aimed to reassess IBTR, considering breast's three-dimensional structure and the unclear significance of superior and deep margins.
methodsWe analyzed 3,712 patients who underwent BCS at Samsung Medical Center (2011-2015), excluding those with metastatic disease, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, bilateral cancer, or benign tumors. IBTR was defined using two criteria: 1) 90-degree angle (IBTR⁹⁰), and 2) 120-degree angle (IBTR¹²⁰), based on the directional location of recurrence relative to the original tumor site. Margin status was evaluated by resection distance and categorized as positive, close (less than 1 mm, excluding positive margins), 1 mm, 2 mm, or > 2 mm.
resultsThis study included 3,712 patients, with a median follow-up of 101 months. Local and distant recurrences occurred in 89 of 3,712 (2.4%) and 101 of 3,712 (2.7%) patients. Using the IBTR⁹⁰ definition, the IBTR rate was the highest in the close margin group (7/219, 3.2%) and increased to 4.6% (11/238) with the 120-degree angle definition. A statistically significant difference in IBTR¹²⁰ rates was observed between margin positive or close margin cases (3.5%) and other margin statuses (1.8%) when superficial and deep margins were excluded (
conclusionIBTR rates were higher in close and positive margin groups under the 120-degree definition, particularly when superficial and deep margins were excluded. Although positive margins did not always show the highest recurrence, margin status still influenced IBTR risk. Re-excision should be individualized based on imaging, pathology, and clinical judgment.
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.