ArticleThe breast journal2026
Recurrence Rate Following Breast Conservation Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in The breast journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recurrence Rate Following Breast Conservation Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.The breast journal · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast-conserving surgery (BCS) has become the standard treatment for early-stage breast cancer, offering oncological safety, better breast aesthetics, and enhanced health-related quality of life. The optimal margins for BCS have been debated. However, evidence on the impact of margin widths greater than 0 mm for invasive breast cancer remains limited. Cambridge Breast Unit (CBU) has adopted a policy where a single margin of < 1 mm (not at ink) for invasive disease would be acceptable, provided the other three radial margins are ≥ 1 mm.
methodRetrospective cohort study analyzed 372 women who underwent BCS for invasive breast cancer at CBU between 2015 and 2016. Patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), prior breast cancer treatment, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. Clinical data, including patient demographics, tumor characteristics, margin status, and recurrence and survival outcomes, were extracted from electronic records.
resultsAt a median follow-up of 5.2 years, the ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) rate was 1.6% (6/372) with an overall recurrence rate of 5.6% (21/372). No significant association was found between final resection margins and local or overall recurrence rates, nor was margin status correlated with breast cancer recurrence-free survival. A total of 53 patients (14.2%) required additional surgeries due to margin status. By accepting a single radial margin < 1 mm, our margin policy reduced reoperations by 33%.
conclusionMargin assessment in breast surgery is multifaceted, requiring a personalized approach that considers tumor biology, systemic treatments, and pathological variability. Our findings support accepting a margin width of < 1 mm (no tumor on ink) for a single radial margin in invasive breast cancer, provided the other three radial margins are ≥ 1 mm. It reduces reoperations without compromising oncological outcomes. Integrating advanced intraoperative techniques and multidisciplinary decision-making will further optimize patient care and long-term outcomes.
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.