Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Breast Conservation Therapy vs Mastectomy on Disease-Specific Survival for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Agarwal, Shailesh, Pappas, Lisa, Neumayer, Leigh, Kokeny, Kristine, Agarwal, Jayant·2014·JAMA Surgery

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: To our knowledge, there are no recent studies that directly compare survival after breast conservation therapy (BCT) vs mastectomy. OBJECTIVE: To compare the breast cancer-specific survival rates of patients undergoing BCT, mastectomy alone, or mastectomy with radiation using a contemporary cohort of patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed univariate, multivariate logistic regression, and propensity analyses to compare the hazard of death for female patients with early-stage invasive ductal carcinoma treated with BCT, mastectomy alone, or mastectomy with radiation during the period from 1998 to 2008. The data were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Early-stage breast cancer was defined as having a tumor size of 4 cm or smaller with 3 or less positive lymph nodes. EXPOSURE: Breast conservation therapy, mastectomy alone, or mastectomy with radiation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hazard of death due to breast cancer for patients undergoing BCT, mastectomy alone, or mastectomy with radiation. RESULTS: A total of 132,149 patients were included in this analysis. Breast conservation therapy was used to treat 70% of patients, mastectomy alone was used to treat 27% of patients, and mastectomy with radiation was used to treat 3% of patients. The 5-year breast cancer-specific survival rates of patients who underwent BCT, a mastectomy alone, or a mastectomy with radiation were 97%, 94%, and 90%, respectively (P < .001); the 10-year breast cancer-specific survival rates were 94%, 90%, and 83%, respectively (P < .001). Multivariate analysis showed that women undergoing BCT had a higher survival rate than those undergoing mastectomy alone (hazard ratio, 1.31; P < .001) or mastectomy with radiation (hazard ratio, 1.47; P < .001). When propensity score stratification was used, the effect of treatment method on survival was similar. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients who underwent BCT have a higher breast cancer-specific survival rate compared with those treated with mastectomy alone or mastectomy with radiation for early-stage invasive ductal carcinoma. Further investigation is warranted to understand what may be contributing to this effect.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3049

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 13 references

Cited by

See all 391

Metadata

Authors
Agarwal, S., Pappas, L., Neumayer, L., Kokeny, K., & Agarwal, J.
Venue
JAMA Surgery
Published
2014-03-01
Volume
149
Issue
3
Pages
267
ISSN
2168-6254 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2140043363
Cited by
391
References
13
FWCI
8.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of Breast Conservation Therapy vs Mastectomy on Disease-Specific Survival for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3049
The paper
Agarwal, S., Pappas, L., Neumayer, L., Kokeny, K., & Agarwal, J. (2014). Effect of Breast Conservation Therapy vs Mastectomy on Disease-Specific Survival for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. JAMA Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3049

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.