ReviewGland surgery2026
Repeat breast-conserving surgery for ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence: towards a paradigm shift-a narrative review.
Review in Gland 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) following breast-conserving therapy (BCT) has traditionally been managed with salvage mastectomy because of concerns regarding oncological safety and toxicity associated with repeat breast conservation and re-irradiation. However, accumulating evidence from retrospective series, meta-analyses, prospective cohort studies, and phase II trials has challenged this longstanding paradigm. This narrative review evaluates the evidence supporting repeat breast-conserving treatment (rBCT) as an alternative to salvage mastectomy in selected patients with IBTR. Methods: A targeted narrative review of published literature was conducted, encompassing meta-analyses, prospective cohort studies, population-based analyses, phase II trials, and relevant international clinical practice guidelines addressing the management of IBTR following BCT. Studies were selected on the basis of clinical relevance, methodological quality, and influence on contemporary practice. Key Content and Findings: Two independent meta-analyses, multicentre cohort data from the GEC-ESTRO study, and two landmark phase II trials (NRG Oncology/RTOG 1014 and RE-IORT) collectively demonstrate that rBCT-defined as repeat breast-conserving surgery (rBCS) combined with adjuvant partial breast re-irradiation-achieves local control and overall survival (OS) comparable to salvage mastectomy in carefully selected patients. Re-irradiation is an oncological prerequisite; its omission is associated with a two- to four-fold increase in second local recurrence. Axillary management is evolving towards de-escalation via repeat sentinel lymph node biopsy (rSLNB) and targeted axillary dissection (TAD). Patient selection, tumour biology, and multidisciplinary planning are central to safe implementation. Conclusions: rBCT represents a clinically valid alternative to salvage mastectomy in carefully selected patients with IBTR, supported by consistent evidence across meta-analyses and prospective trials. Randomised controlled trial data are lacking; ongoing trials (BREAST, REPEAT, and BRASIL) are expected to provide the level I evidence required to inform formal guideline revision. rBCT should be routinely offered and discussed at multidisciplinary team (MDT) level in eligible patients.
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.