ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2026
Age-specific survival after breast conservation versus mastectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 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
purposeBreast conservation for invasive breast cancer is associated with better survival and fewer complications than mastectomy, which is especially relevant for older patients. It is unclear whether this can be extrapolated to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
methodsThis population-based cohort study used data from the Breast Cancer Database Sweden (BCBaSe 3.0) to compare overall survival (OS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and local recurrence (LR) probabilities in three different age groups (< 60, 60-69, 70 + years) of women with primary DCIS undergoing breast-conserving surgery with radiotherapy (BCS + RT), mastectomy without radiotherapy (Mx-RT), or breast-conserving surgery without radiotherapy (BCS-RT) during 2008-2019. Complete cases (CC) and multiple imputation (MI) analyses were applied.
resultsIn 7165 women, treatment was BCS + RT (53.3%), BCS-RT (13.4%), or Mx-RT (33.2%). Estimated 10-year OS was 90.4% (95% CI 89.3-91.5) and BCSS 98.8% (98.3-99.2). After adjustments for patient and tumour factors, including socioeconomic status and comorbidity, Mx-RT was associated with a higher overall mortality than BCS + RT in CC (HR 2.10; 95% CI 1.20-3.67) but not in MI analyses (HR 1.29; 0.95-1.76). In age 70 + years, however, the overall mortality was consistently increased (CC: HR 2.48; 1.09-5.62, MI: HR 1.89; 1.23-2.90). Also BCS-RT was associated with a higher overall mortality than BCS + RT (CC: HR 2.68; 1.34-5.34, and MI: HR 1.72; 1.23-2.39). The 10-year LR probability was low (7.2%, 95% CI 6.3-8.0). Compared to BCS + RT, Mx-RT was associated with a lower (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.11-0.28) and BCS-RT with a higher LR risk (HR 1.79; 1.31-2.46), especially among ages 70+.
conclusionBCS + RT in DCIS appears safe. Acknowledging potential selection bias, BCS + RT may be associated with favourable overall survival outcomes in older women despite a higher risk of local recurrence.
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.