Clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of invasive breast cancer: Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) practice guidelines 2021

Liu, Miao; Wang, Chaobin; Xie, Fang; Yuan, Peng; Wang, Shu

doi:10.1097/cm9.0000000000001498

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Women with increased risk: begin before 40 years; annual screening with mammography; annual ultrasonography; annual breast MRI (level of evidence: I; recommendation strength: A) ( 47 ).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Imaging diagnosis: diagnostic mammography; ultrasound; MRI (level of evidence: I; recommendation strength: A) ( 47 ).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Image-guided LN biopsy: fine needle biopsy; CNB (level of evidence: I; recommendation strength: A) ( 47 ).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…BCS combined with oncoplastic techniques (level of evidence: II; recommendation strength: A) ( 47 ).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) Practice Guideline 2022

Xiang¹,

Liu²

2023

Transl Breast Cancer Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) Practice Guideline 2021 was published nearly one year ago. The new guideline was revised based on comprehensive feedback of the previous publication. The aim is to provide a better reference suitable for Chinese breast surgeons.Methods: Referred to GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system, evidences accepted by the Guideline were classified into four categories: I, II, III and IV, which reflected the reliability of the evidences quantitatively. The guideline also comprehensively considered the accessibility of the guideline in clinical practice in China and gave recommendations with different strengths. Results:The guideline emphasized the basic idea that a curative surgical approach falls under the category of radical tumor surgery. Six chapters, including "Diagnosis and treatment of patients with invasive breast cancer", "Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early-stage breast cancer", "Breast-conserving surgery in patients with early-stage breast cancer", "Modified radical mastectomy of breast cancer", "Central venous access for the systemic treatment of breast cancer", and "Breast cancer in pregnancy and postpartum breast cancer" were revised.Conclusions: Compared with the 2021 edition, the new guideline has been revised in six chapters based on the latest research evidence and clinical needs.

show abstract

“…Women with increased risk: begin before 40 years; annual screening with mammography; annual ultrasonography; annual breast MRI (level of evidence: I; recommendation strength: A) ( 47 ).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Imaging diagnosis: diagnostic mammography; ultrasound; MRI (level of evidence: I; recommendation strength: A) ( 47 ).…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) Practice Guideline 2022

Xiang¹,

Liu²

2023

Transl Breast Cancer Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With the advancements and standardization of surgery and postoperative adjuvant RT technology, stage II and a considerable proportion of stage III patients tend to receive BCS [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. European and American guidelines recommend RT after mastectomy for patients with stage T3, extensive tumor multifocality, and positive axillary lymph nodes [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. However, no randomized controlled trials investigated the survival outcomes between BCS plus RT group and mastectomy plus RT group.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival Comparisons between Breast Conservation Surgery and Mastectomy Followed by Postoperative Radiotherapy in Stage I–III Breast Cancer Patients: Analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (Seer) Program Database

Xiang

et al. 2022

Current Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study aims to evaluate the overall and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy (RT) compared with mastectomy plus RT in resectable breast cancer. Moreover, the aim is to also identify the subgroups who benefit from BCS plus RT and establish a predictive nomogram for stage II patients. Methods: Stage I–III breast cancer patients were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 1990 and 2016. Patients with available clinical information were split into two groups: BCS plus RT and mastectomy plus RT. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, univariate and multivariate regression analysis, and propensity score matching were used in the study. Hazard ratio (HR) was calculated based on stratified Cox univariate regression analyses. A prognostic nomogram by multivariable Cox regression model was developed for stage II patients, and consistency index (C-index) and calibration curve were used to evaluate the accuracy of the nomogram in the training and validation set. Results: A total of 24,590 eligible patients were enrolled. The difference in overall survival (OS) and BCSS remained significant in stage II patients both before and after PSM (after PSM: OS: HR = 0.8536, p = 0.0115; BCSS: HR = 0.7803, p = 0.0013). In stage II patients, the survival advantage effect of BCS plus RT on OS and BCSS was observed in the following subgroups: any age, smaller tumor size (<1 cm), stage IIA (T2N0, T0–1N1), ER (+), and any PR status. Secondly, the C-indexes for BCSS prediction was 0.714 (95% CI 0.694–0.734). The calibration curves showed perfect agreement in both the training and validation sets. Conclusions: BCS plus RT significantly improved the survival rates for patients of stage IIA (T2N0, T0–1N1), ER (+). For stage II patients, the nomogram was a good predictor of 5-, 10-, and 15-year BCSS. Our study may help guide treatment decisions and prolong the survival of stage II breast cancer patients.

show abstract