ReviewTranslational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer2026
Extent of resection in breast conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a literature review.
Review in Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) could cause tumor shrinkage and result in a higher rate of breast conservation. However, the extent of resection in breast conserving surgery (BCS) following NACT remained unclear. We conducted a literature review to determine the extent of resection in BCS after NACT. Methods: A PubMed search was conducted for relevant articles from 1 Key Content and Findings: Six studies (171 patients) and 11 studies (2,276 patients) with original and residual tumor resection respectively were reviewed. The average re-excision rates were 6.3% (range, 0-10.3%) and 9.6% (range, 0-19.2%) respectively. Average local recurrence rates were 10.9% (range, 7.7-14%) and 3.5% (range, 0.65-7.6%) after a follow-up of 44 (range, 36-51.9) and 49.8 (range, 19-86.4) months in patients with original and residual tumor resection respectively. Comparing patients with resection of residual tumor with various groups of patients who had undergone upfront surgery or mastectomy or resection of the original tumor bed, the studies did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in terms of margin status and oncological outcomes. Conclusions: Limited and heterogenous data exist on the extent of resection in BCS after NACT. No statistically significant difference was demonstrated by the studies in terms of re-excision rates and oncological outcomes between the two groups. These findings require validation in larger well-designed studies.
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.