↓ Skip to main content

Waiting time for radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery in early breast cancer: a retrospective analysis of local relapse and distant metastases in 615 patients

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Medical Research, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Waiting time for radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery in early breast cancer: a retrospective analysis of local relapse and distant metastases in 615 patients
Published in
European Journal of Medical Research, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40001-016-0226-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raffaella Caponio, Maria Paola Ciliberti, Giusi Graziano, Rocco Necchia, Giovanni Scognamillo, Antonio Pascali, Sabino Bonaduce, Anna Milella, Gabriele Matichecchia, Cristian Cristofaro, Davide Di Fatta, Pasquale Tamborra, Marco Lioce

Abstract

Postoperative radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is the standard in the management of breast cancer. The optimal timing for starting postoperative radiation therapy has not yet been well defined. In this study, we aimed to evaluate if the time interval between BCS and postoperative radiotherapy is related to the incidence of local and distant relapse in women with early node-negative breast cancer not receiving chemotherapy. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data concerning 615 women treated from 1984 to 2010, divided into three groups according to the timing of radiotherapy: ≤60, 61-120, and >120 days. To estimate the presence of imbalanced distribution of prognostic and treatment factors among the three groups, the χ2 test or the Fisher exact test were performed. Local relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariate Cox regression was used to test for the independent effect of timing of RT after adjusting for known confounding factors. The median follow-up time was 65.8 months. Differences in distribution of age, type of hormone therapy, and year of diagnosis were statistically significant. At 15-year follow-up, we failed to detect a significant correlation between time interval and the risk of local relapse (p = 0.09) both at the univariate and the multivariate analysis. The DMFS and the DFS univariate analysis showed a decreased outcome when radiotherapy was started early (p = 0.041 and p = 0.046), but this was not confirmed at the multivariate analysis (p = 0.406 and p = 0.102, respectively). Our results show that no correlation exists between the timing of postoperative radiotherapy and the risk of local relapse or distant metastasis development in a particular subgroup of women with node-negative early breast cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 22%
Student > Bachelor 6 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 11 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 January 2017.
All research outputs
#16,046,765
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Medical Research
#375
of 923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,135
of 369,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Medical Research
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 369,320 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.