Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFancellu, A
dc.contributor.authorHoussami, Nehmat
dc.contributor.authorSanna, V
dc.contributor.authorPorcu, A
dc.contributor.authorNinniri, C
dc.contributor.authorMarinovich, M L
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-07T00:29:06Z
dc.date.available2023-03-07T00:29:06Z
dc.date.issued2021en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/30156
dc.description.abstractBackground In patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), oncological and survival outcomes based on locoregional treatment are poorly understood. In particular, the safety of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for TNBC has been questioned. Methods A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant metastasis (DM), and overall survival (OS) rates in patients with TNBC who had breast-conserving surgery versus mastectomy. Estimates were pooled in random-effects analysis. The effect of study-level co-variables was assessed by univariable metaregression. Results Fourteen studies, including 19 819 patients operated for TNBC met the inclusion criteria; 9828 patients (49.6 per cent) underwent BCS and 9991 (50.4 per cent) had a mastectomy. Patients with smaller tumours were more likely to be selected for BCS (pooled odds ratio (OR) for T1 tumours 1.95, 95 per cent c.i. 1.64 to 2.32; P < 0.001). The pooled OR for LRR was 0.64 (0.48 to 0.85; P = 0.002), indicating a statistically significantly lower odds of LRR among women who had BCS relative to mastectomy. The pooled OR for DM was 0.70 (0.53 to 0.94; P = 0.02), indicating a lower odds of DM among women who had BCS; however, this difference diminished with increasing study-level age and follow-up time. A pooled hazard ratio of 0.78 (0.69 to 0.89; P < 0.001) showed a significantly lower hazard for all-cause mortality among women undergoing BCS versus mastectomy. Conclusion These results should be interpreted cautiously owing to likely differences in selection for BCS or mastectomy in the included studies. Patients with TNBC selected for BCS do not, however, have a worse prognosis than those treated with mastectomy, and breast conservation can be offered when feasible clinically.en_AU
dc.language.isoenen_AU
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofBritish Journal of Surgeryen_AU
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0en_AU
dc.subjectsafetyen_AU
dc.subjectmastectomyen_AU
dc.subjectneoplasmsen_AU
dc.subjectbreast conserving surgeryen_AU
dc.subjectmetastasisen_AU
dc.subjectdistanten_AU
dc.subjecttriple-negative breast canceren_AU
dc.titleOutcomes after breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer: meta-analysisen_AU
dc.typeArticleen_AU
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/bjs/znab145
dc.type.pubtypePublisher's versionen_AU
dc.relation.nhmrc1194410
dc.relation.otherNational Breast Cancer Foundation Investigator Initiated Research Scheme grant (IIRS-20-011)
usyd.facultySeS faculties schools::Faculty of Medicine and Health::Sydney School of Public Healthen_AU
usyd.citation.volume108en_AU
usyd.citation.issue7en_AU
usyd.citation.spage760en_AU
usyd.citation.epage768en_AU
workflow.metadata.onlyYesen_AU


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

There are no files associated with this item.

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.