ArticleWorld journal of surgery2026
Breast Cancer Multi-Disciplinary Team Meetings in a Resource-Constrained System: Are Patients Receiving the Treatment Recommended?
Article in World journal of surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlobally, breast cancer is a sentinel health crisis, with 2.3 million new cases annually. In comparison with HICs, the stage of presentation in LMICs is higher, with a greater number of deaths occurring due to metastatic disease. A call for action with a global strategy for breast cancer is required, with an increasing role of the multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT). Its (the MDT's) use in resource-constrained systems is not well established. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of MDT decisions and determine the concordance of treatment recommendations and those received by the patient. Additionally, concordance across disease stages was assessed.
methodsRetrospective data of all adult patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer and discussed at the MDT between 01 July 2021 and 30 June 2022 were collected. Patients with recurrent breast cancer, those primarily referred for palliative care, and patients with incomplete data (treatment received "unknown") were excluded. The decision made by the MDT and the primary treatment received by the patients were assessed to determine concordance. Rates of concordance and stage of disease were calculated using contingency tables. Descriptive statistics were computed to describe continuous and categorical data.
resultsA total of 556 patients were included in the analyses. Most patients (88%) received primary treatment aligned with the MDT's recommendations. The highest level of concordance was seen in those with early breast cancer who were recommended to have primary surgery (94%), and the lowest in those with metastatic disease.
conclusionsFindings demonstrate that most breast cancer patients received the treatment recommended by the MDT. Reasons for discordance could be explored in future studies. We recommend that an MDT form part of breast patient care in South Africa (SA).
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.