A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Do screen-detected breast cancers have positive margins less often than clinically detected breast cancers? | LitMetric

Positive tumour margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) have been selected as one of the major quality criteria for the surgical treatment of localized primary breast cancer. The national guideline states that the rate of positive margins should not exceed 30% in ductal carcinoma in situ and 20% in invasive cancers. We aimed to determine whether BCS in women with screen-detected breast cancer (SDBC) will have positive margins less often compared with women with clinically detected breast cancer (CDBC). Furthermore, the choice of subsequent therapy is studied when margins were positive after initial BCS. Women 50-75 years of age who underwent BCS for invasive breast cancer between July 2008 and December 2009 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Data were merged with the National Cancer Screening Program, regions North and East, to identify women with SDBC. The relation to screening history, clinical and pathological factors was evaluated for correlation with margin status using multilevel analysis. Of 1537 women with an invasive breast cancer, 873 (57%) were diagnosed through the screening programme. SDBCs were significantly smaller (87 vs. 69% T1 tumours, i.e. ≤2 cm), more often well differentiated (33 vs. 26%), preoperatively confirmed (98 vs. 96%), diagnosed in a nonteaching hospital (60 vs. 66%) and more often had negative lymph nodes (LNs) (80 vs. 68%). In 170 out of 1537 women, the resection margins were positive. Multivariable analysis showed that hospital, tumour size, multifocality, positive LNs and absent preoperative confirmation were predictors of positive margins. No difference was found between women with SDBC and CDBC. Of women with positive margins, 90% underwent additional surgery. Women diagnosed with SDBC do not have a lower risk of having positive margins after BCS than women with CDBC. Although positive margins may occur in 11% of women with invasive tumours, well below the percentage recommended by the national guideline, the presence of encouraging factors by SDBC such as a smaller tumour size, unifocality, negative LNs and the presence of preoperative confirmation should not lead to performing a more sparing excision than is considered usual for comparable CDBC.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0b013e32835f3b70DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

positive margins
28
breast cancer
20
bcs women
12
positive
11
women
11
margins
10
screen-detected breast
8
clinically detected
8
detected breast
8
national guideline
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!