The prognostic significance of the percentage of positive/dissected axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer recurrence and survival in patients with one to three positive axillary lymph nodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy for women with T1-T2 breast carcinoma and 1-3 positive lymph nodes is controversial due to discrepancies in reported baseline locoregional recurrence (LRR) risks. This inconsistency has been attributed to variations in lymph node staging techniques, which have yielded different numbers of dissected lymph nodes. The current study evaluated the prognostic impact of the percentage of positive/dissected lymph nodes on recurrence and survival in women with one to three positive lymph nodes. METHODS: The study cohort was comprised of 542 women with pathologic T1-T2 breast carcinoma who had 1-3 positive lymph nodes and who had undergone mastectomy and received adjuvant systemic therapy without radiotherapy. Ten-year Kaplan-Meier (KM) LRR, distant recurrence (DR), and overall survival (OS) rates stratified by the number of positive lymph nodes, the number of dissected lymph nodes, and the percentage of positive lymph nodes were examined using different cut-off levels. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the prognostic significance of the percentage of positive lymph nodes in disease recurrence and survival. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 7.5 years. LRR, DR, and OS rates correlated significantly with the number of positive lymph nodes and the percentage of positive lymph nodes, but not with the number of dissected lymph nodes. The cut-off level at which the most significant difference in LRR was observed was 25% positive lymph nodes (the 10-year KM LRR rates were 13.9% and 36.7% in women with < or = 25% and > 25% positive lymph nodes, respectively; P < 0.0001). Higher DR rates and lower OS rates were observed among patients who had > 25% positive lymph nodes compared with patients who had < or = 25% positive lymph nodes (DR: 53.0% vs. 30.3%, respectively; P < 0.0001; OS: 43.4% vs. 62.6%, respectively; P < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis, the percentage of positive lymph nodes and the histologic grade were significant, independent factors associated with LRR, DR, and OS. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of > 25% positive lymph nodes was an adverse prognostic factor in patients with 1-3 positive nodes and may be used to identify patients at high risks of postmastectomy locoregional and distant recurrence who may benefit with adjuvant radiotherapy and more aggressive systemic therapy regimens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".