↓ Skip to main content

Time to Surgery and Breast Cancer Survival in the United States

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Oncology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
16 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
157 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
425 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
310 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
Time to Surgery and Breast Cancer Survival in the United States
Published in
JAMA Oncology, March 2016
DOI 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.4508
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard J. Bleicher, Karen Ruth, Elin R. Sigurdson, J. Robert Beck, Eric Ross, Yu-Ning Wong, Sameer A. Patel, Marcia Boraas, Eric I. Chang, Neal S. Topham, Brian L. Egleston

Abstract

Time to surgery (TTS) is of concern to patients and clinicians, but controversy surrounds its effect on breast cancer survival. There remains little national data evaluating the association. To investigate the relationship between the time from diagnosis to breast cancer surgery and survival, using separate analyses of 2 of the largest cancer databases in the United States. Two independent population-based studies were conducted of prospectively collected national data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database and the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The SEER-Medicare cohort included Medicare patients older than 65 years, and the NCDB cohort included patients cared for at Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities throughout the United States. Each analysis assessed overall survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery by evaluating 5 intervals (≤30, 31-60, 61-90, 91-120, and 121-180 days) and disease-specific survival at 60-day intervals. All patients were diagnosed with noninflammatory, nonmetastatic, invasive breast cancer and underwent surgery as initial treatment. Overall and disease-specific survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery, after adjusting for patient, demographic, and tumor-related factors. The SEER-Medicare cohort had 94 544 patients 66 years or older diagnosed between 1992 and 2009. With each interval of delay increase, overall survival was lower overall (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.13; P < .001), and in patients with stage I (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; P < .001) and stage II disease (HR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .01). Breast cancer-specific mortality increased with each 60-day interval (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.54; P = .03). The NCDB study evaluated 115 790 patients 18 years or older diagnosed between 2003 and 2005. The overall mortality HR was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.07-1.13; P < .001) for each increasing interval, significant in stages I (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.21; P < .001) and II (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13; P < .001) only, after adjusting for demographic, tumor, and treatment factors. Greater TTS is associated with lower overall and disease-specific survival, and a shortened delay is associated with benefits comparable to some standard therapies. Although time is required for preoperative evaluation and consideration of options such as reconstruction, efforts to reduce TTS should be pursued when possible to enhance survival.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 157 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 310 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 307 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 34 11%
Other 31 10%
Student > Master 29 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 9%
Student > Bachelor 25 8%
Other 74 24%
Unknown 89 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 114 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Social Sciences 8 3%
Other 37 12%
Unknown 114 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 238. 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 24 March 2024.
All research outputs
#159,803
of 25,551,063 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Oncology
#278
of 3,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,756
of 312,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Oncology
#4
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,551,063 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,332 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 84.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 312,963 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.