ArticleBJS open2026
Role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early breast cancer undergoing mastectomy.
Article in BJS open, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe oncological non-inferiority of sentinel lymph node biopsy omission in patients with small, clinically and imaging node-negative (cN0/iN0) breast cancer has been demonstrated for patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy, but not for those undergoing mastectomy. This single-centre, retrospective cohort study compared nodal involvement and adjuvant therapy indications in these patients by use of mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery.
methodsPatients with cT1-T2, cN0/iN0, hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early breast cancer who underwent upfront surgery including sentinel lymph node biopsy between January 2014 and December 2024 were included. Adjuvant therapy indications were estimated using monarchE (abemaciclib), NATALEE (ribociclib), TAILORx and RxPONDER (chemotherapy), and MA.20 and EORTC22922/10925 (nodal irradiation) eligibility criteria. Multivariable logistic regression models identified factors associated with nodal involvement and adjuvant treatment indications.
resultsAmong 454 patients, 145 (31.9%) underwent mastectomy who more frequently had multifocal tumours (23.5% versus 9.7%), lobular subtype (21.4% versus 11.3%), and grade 2-3 differentiation (73.8% versus 63.8%) compared with those who underwent breast-conserving surgery. Neither nodal involvement (18.6% versus 14.9%; P = 0.149) nor missed indications for adjuvant abemaciclib (7.6% versus 6.1%; P = 0.550), ribociclib (9.7% versus 7.8%; P = 0.586), and nodal irradiation (4.8% versus 4.5%; P = 1.000) differed between patients who underwent mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery. Lymphovascular invasion was independently associated with nodal involvement (odds ratio 6.8, 95% confidence interval 3.7 to 12.8; P < 0.001) and adjuvant treatment indications (CDK4/6 inhibitors: odds ratio 5.1, 2.6 to 10.1; P < 0.001; nodal irradiation: odds ratio 7.1, 3.6 to 14.4; P < 0.001), whereas type of surgery was not.
conclusionsIn patients with cT1-T2, cN0/iN0, hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer, type of breast surgery was not associated with nodal involvement and adjuvant therapy.
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.