ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2026
Overall survival outcomes in occult primary breast cancer.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCounseling patients with occult primary breast cancer (OPBC) can be challenging due its infrequency and the paucity of oncologic outcomes data. We aimed to evaluate the management and overall survival (OS) of patients with OPBC compared to patients with primary breast tumors.
methodsWe identified patients with node positive breast cancer from the National Cancer Database (2010-2021). OPBC was classified at cT0. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsOf 254,708 patients with cT0-4N1-3 disease, 2680 patients with OPBC were identified (cT0N1 63.4%, cT0N2 72.5%, cT0N3 80.7%). Five-year OS for cT0N1 (88.5%) was most similar to cT1N1 disease (88.2%) and better than cT2-4N1. On multivariable analysis, cT1-4N1 had significantly worse survival than cT0N1 (HR: 1.30-3.84, each p < 0.001). Patients with cT0N2 disease had similar 5-year OS to cT1N2, both 83.4%. Similarly, patients with cT0N2 had improved survival compared to patients with cT2-4N2 (HR: 1.62-3.02, each p < 0.001). In cN3 patients, OS of OPBC was 72.8% vs 73.9% for cT1, 73.3% for cT2, 67.2% cT3, and 52.6% cT4. Within OPBC, increasing age (HR 1.64, p < 0.001), triple negative biology (HR 1.27, p = 0.0499) and increasing nodal category were associated with worse survival.
conclusionsOutcome for OPBC is favorable and is similar to cT1N + disease across all cN categories. Factors that impact OS included older age, increasing clinical N category, worse Charlson Deyo Comorbidity Score, non-white race and triple negative tumor biology.
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.