↓ Skip to main content

Predictors of Surgical Margin Following Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Large Population-Based Cohort Study

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Surgical Oncology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
Title
Predictors of Surgical Margin Following Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Large Population-Based Cohort Study
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology, September 2016
DOI 10.1245/s10434-016-5532-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolien H. M. van Deurzen

Abstract

The purpose of this retrospective, population-based, cohort study was to identify patient and tumor characteristics that are associated with a high risk of tumor-positive margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) to optimize preoperative counseling. All patients with invasive breast cancer (IBC) reported according to the synoptic reporting module in the Dutch Pathology Registry between 2009 and 2015 were included (n = 42.048 cases). Data extraction included age, type of surgery, several tumor characteristics, and resection margin status according to the Dutch indications for re-excision (free, focally positive, or more than focally positive). Univariate and multivariate tests were used to determine the association between clinicopathological features and margin status, restricted to patients with BCS. Of 42,048 cases, a total of 25,315 cases (60.2 %) with IBC underwent BCS. Of these patients, 2578 patients (10.2 %) had focally positive resection margins and 1665 (6.6 %) had more than focally positive resection margins. By univariate analysis, the following features were significantly associated with involved margins: age < 60 years, multifocality, lobular subtype, tumor size >2 cm, intermediate- and high-grade, positive ER status, positive Her2 status, angio-invasion, and the presence/extent of a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component. In multivariate logistic regression, the variables with the strongest association with involved margins (OR > 2) were multifocality, lobular subtype, large tumor size, and the presence of DCIS. Several clinicopathologic features are associated with involved resection margins after BCS for IBC. Assessment of these features preoperatively could be used to optimize preoperative counseling.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 16 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 53%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 13 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,383,207
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#4,402
of 6,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,134
of 337,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#83
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,492 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 337,011 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.