Breast-conserving surgery vs. total mastectomy in patients with triple negative breast cancer in early stages: A propensity score analysis
Résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) as an alternative to total mastectomy (TM) in patients with early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is not widely spread. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between both surgical approaches in early-stage TNBC patients at 10 years. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in TNBC female patients with stage I-IIa, treated at a single-center during the period of 2000-2014. We estimated and compared the survival rates with the Kaplan Meier and Long-rank test. Propensity scores were calculated with the generalized boosted regression model and were used in the multivariate Cox regression analysis with the covariate adjustment method. RESULTS: We included 288 patients, 111 in the BCS vs. 177 in the TM group. The median follow-up was 102 months. Moreover, the patients in the BCS group had superior OS (85% vs. 81%, p = 0.56) and DFS (83% vs. 80%, p = 0.42) at 10 years. In the multivariate Cox analysis, BCS decreased the mortality risk (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.37-1.67, p = 0.538), and the locoregional or distant recurrence risk (HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.32-1.41, p = 0.294), albeit with no statistical significance. CONCLUSION: BCS is a safe alternative to TM in Latin-American patients with early-stage TNBC.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Breast-conserving surgery vs. total mastectomy in patients with triple negative breast cancer in early stages: A propensity score analysis
- Date Crossref
- 11/02/2020
- Éditeur
- SAGE Publications
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.