MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408386388 · doi:10.21037/abs-24-35

Exploring the association between post-operative complications, disease-recurrence & mortality in primary operable breast cancer—systematic review & meta-analysis

2025· article· en· W4408386388 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mhairi Mactier, Laura Arthur, Joanne Edwards, Julie Doughty, László Romics

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Breast Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicineBreast cancerOncologyInternal medicineCancerDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Post-operative complications (POCs) affect 36.1% of breast cancer patients. POCs are associated with inferior oncological outcomes in gastro-intestinal, lung, and head and neck cancers. Evidence is less clear in breast cancer. The James Lind Alliance demonstrated the importance of exploring risk factors for disease-recurrence to both patients and clinicians. We reviewed the evidence and performed a meta-analysis to better understand the association between POCs, disease-recurrence and mortality in primary breast cancer. Methods: A PubMed search was conducted on 1st February 2024. Journal titles and abstracts were screened for suitability. Bibliographies of suitable studies were hand-searched for additional eligible studies. Original articles focusing on oncological outcomes after the development of POCs in primary breast cancer were included. Articles analysing risk factors for development of POCs or those assessing in situ or metastatic disease were excluded. Studies were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model and presented using Forest plots. Results: Sixteen original studies were included in our review. Two large population studies demonstrate inferior survival in elderly patients who develop major surgical or medical complications, however, neither study accounts for recurrence or cancer-specific survival. Evidence for other comorbidities is lacking. Mastectomy demonstrates increased POC risk and is associated with inferior survival compared to conservation surgery [overall: hazard ratio (HR) 1.32, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15–1.51; cancer-specific: HR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.04–1.65]. There is however a paucity of evidence exploring impact of POCs following oncoplastic and/or reconstructive surgery. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significant effect of POCs in increasing the risk of recurrence (HR 1.35, 95% CI: 1.17–1.56, P<0.001), though a high degree of heterogeneity was noted (I2=86%). Variability in ‘wound complication’ definition and associated incidence, as well as the primary outcome reported (locoregional; systemic; any-site recurrence) was noted. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significant impact of POCs on the risk of all-cause mortality (HR 1.27, 95% CI: 1.17–1.39, P<0.001), with no heterogeneity observed (I2=0%). Conclusions: Increased age and mastectomy increase the risk of POC with associated inferior survival. The impact on disease-recurrence remains uncertain. Prospective studies with well-defined criteria are required, alongside studies exploring cellular level changes in primary breast cancer to better understand the underlying mechanism.

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)0.001
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 score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Breast SurgerySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207