ArticleHistopathology2026
Pathological assessment of tumour beds in breast excisions post-neoadjuvant therapy: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Histopathology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe pathological assessment of breast cancer resection specimens with neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) offers invaluable information for prognosis and further management. At times, these cases are difficult to pathologically evaluate, at least partly due to tumour bed obscuration after NAT. This study aimed to compare time and resource utilization by surgical pathology laboratories when handling breast specimens treated with NAT against those without NAT. We secondarily aimed to identify features associated with tumour bed identifiability at gross assessment. METHODS AND
resultsIn this retrospective, single-institution study, we identified 241 breast resection specimens with systemic NAT between 2019 and 2025. A 1:1 non-NAT control group was randomly selected. The NAT cohort had a higher median number of tissue blocks (20.0 versus 13.0, P < 0.001), as well as larger proportions requiring gross resampling (23.7% versus 7.1%, P < 0.001) and pathologist review (16.2% versus 4.6%, P < 0.001) compared with the control. The NAT cohort had a longer median pathology report turnaround time (17.0 days versus 15.0 days, P < 0.001). In NAT cases, pretreatment clinical stage was associated with macroscopic identifiability of the tumour bed.
conclusionsBreast cancer resection specimens with NAT required significantly more time and laboratory resources than similar specimens without NAT. As NAT becomes more frequent across breast and other cancer types, pathological assessment of the excisional specimens from these patients is expected to become more challenging and time-consuming. By recognizing these trends early, healthcare systems can plan and allocate resources accordingly.
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.