MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104199435 · doi:10.1002/cncr.20153

Effect of margins on ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after breast conservation therapy for lymph node‐negative breast carcinoma

2004· article· en· W2104199435 on OpenAlexaff
Carson Leong, John Boyages, Upali W Jayasinghe, Michael Bilous, Owen Ung, Boon Chua, Elizabeth Salisbury, Angela Y. Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymph nodeBreast cancerOncologyBreast carcinomaInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breast conservative surgery (CS) with radiotherapy (RT) is the most commonly used treatment for early-stage breast carcinoma. However, there is controversy regarding the importance of the pathologic margin status on the risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). The current study evaluated the effect of the pathologic margin status on IBTR rates in a cohort of women with lymph node-negative breast carcinoma treated with CS and RT. METHODS: Between August 1980 and December 1994, 452 women with pathologically lymph node-negative breast carcinoma were treated with CS and RT at Westmead Hospital (Westmead, Australia). Central pathology review was performed for all women. The final margins were negative for 352 women (77.9%), positive (invasive and/or in situ) for 42 women (9.3%), and indeterminate for 58 women (12.8%). Information regarding an extensive intraductal component (EIC), lymphovascular invasion, pathologic tumor size, histologic grade, and nuclear grade was available for most women. After macroscopic total excision of the tumor, all women received whole-breast irradiation (usually 45-50.4 grays [Gy]) and the majority of women also received a local tumor bed boost (range, 8-30 Gy). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 80 months, 34 women (7.5%) developed an IBTR. The crude 5-year rates of IBTR for women with negative margins, positive margins, and indeterminate margins were 3.1%, 11.9%, and 6.9%, respectively. For women with negative margins, the 5-year and 10-year actuarial rates of freedom from IBTR were 96% and 92%, respectively, compared with 88% and 75%, respectively, for women with positive margins (P = 0.003). Univariate analysis demonstrated that the only factors associated with a significantly higher risk of IBTR were age at diagnosis (P < 0.050) and margin status (P = 0.005). Multivariate analysis showed that both age and margin status were independent predictors of IBTR. None of 24 patients with an EIC and negative margins were found to have developed an IBTR. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study were comparable to other published reports and supported the association of higher IBTR rates with positive or indeterminate margins compared with negative, pathologic margins. Furthermore, young age (age < 35 years at diagnosis) was associated with the highest risk of IBTR regardless of margin status.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations157
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207