1987
DOI: 10.1016/0360-3016(87)90256-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Conservation treatment of early breast cancer: Long term results and complications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
65
0
5

Year Published

1989
1989
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 212 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
10
65
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…These two reports are examples of quite different treatments policy, and show the range of survival rates that can be obtained after breast-conserving treatment. For disease-free survival, rates ranging from 75% to 90% after 5 years and from 69% to 75% after 10 years have been reported (15)(16)(17)(18)(19). The survival rates for our patients (93% survival after 5 years, 91% after 8 years, 87% and 85% metastasesfree survival after 5 and 8 years) are similar.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 72%
“…These two reports are examples of quite different treatments policy, and show the range of survival rates that can be obtained after breast-conserving treatment. For disease-free survival, rates ranging from 75% to 90% after 5 years and from 69% to 75% after 10 years have been reported (15)(16)(17)(18)(19). The survival rates for our patients (93% survival after 5 years, 91% after 8 years, 87% and 85% metastasesfree survival after 5 and 8 years) are similar.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 72%
“…6,23,30,36±41 The appearance of this type of injury dictated a stepwise reduction in radiation dose and increasing fractionation throughout the sixties. 21,22 Since the early seventies the standard treatment policy of radiation therapy is a moderate doses (50 Gy) to the breast and locoregional lymph drainage area such as axilla and supraclavicular, with higher doses directed only to the tumor bed. 21 Radiation therapy only to the breast did not increase incidence of upper limb morbidity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…21,22 Since the early seventies the standard treatment policy of radiation therapy is a moderate doses (50 Gy) to the breast and locoregional lymph drainage area such as axilla and supraclavicular, with higher doses directed only to the tumor bed. 21 Radiation therapy only to the breast did not increase incidence of upper limb morbidity. 28 The incidence of late morbidity after breast cancer treatment: arm edema and reduced range of motion of the shoulder, varies widely due to differences in study population, surgical procedures, radiation dose and fractionation and assessment methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other explanations for the differences found were the woman's age at diagnosis (older women were less likely to undergo BCS) (Silliman et al, 1989;Cady and Stone, 1990;Farrow et al, 1992;Ganz, 1992;Satariano et al, 1992;Howe et al, 1995), geography (Cady and Stone, 1990;Ferguson et al, 1990;Farrow et al, 1992;Howe et al, 1995), and the availability of radiotherapy (Cady and Stone, 1990). Also, physician preference (Cady and Stone, 1990;Long, 1993), tumour size (Delouche et al, 1987;Cady and Stone, 1990;Margolese, 1995), the patient's own personal preferences (Cady and Stone, 1990), local medical customs and practices (Cady and Stone, 1990;Kiebert et al, 1991;Margolese, 1995), and co-morbidity (Satariano, 1992) all influence the choice of surgical procedure. Because we were able to use data on surgical procedures and length of stay from a national database, the treatment algorithms that we have developed incorporate the above-mentioned variations in practice patterns and surgical choices into the national average.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%