The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Cavity Shave Margins in Breast Cancer
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Routine resection of cavity shave margins (additional tissue circumferentially around the cavity left by partial mastectomy) may reduce the rates of positive margins (margins positive for tumor) and reexcision among patients undergoing partial mastectomy for breast cancer. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled trial, we assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, 235 patients with breast cancer of stage 0 to III who were undergoing partial mastectomy, with or without resection of selective margins, to have further cavity shave margins resected (shave group) or not to have further cavity shave margins resected (no-shave group). Randomization occurred intraoperatively after surgeons had completed standard partial mastectomy. Positive margins were defined as tumor touching the edge of the specimen that was removed in the case of invasive cancer and tumor that was within 1 mm of the edge of the specimen removed in the case of ductal carcinoma in situ. The rate of positive margins was the primary outcome measure; secondary outcome measures included cosmesis and the volume of tissue resected. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 61 years (range, 33 to 94). On final pathological testing, 54 patients (23%) had invasive cancer, 45 (19%) had ductal carcinoma in situ, and 125 (53%) had both; 11 patients had no further disease. The median size of the tumor in the greatest diameter was 1.1 cm (range, 0 to 6.5) in patients with invasive carcinoma and 1.0 cm (range, 0 to 9.3) in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Groups were well matched at baseline with respect to demographic and clinicopathological characteristics. The rate of positive margins after partial mastectomy (before randomization) was similar in the shave group and the no-shave group (36% and 34%, respectively; P=0.69). After randomization, patients in the shave group had a significantly lower rate of positive margins than did those in the no-shave group (19% vs. 34%, P=0.01), as well as a lower rate of second surgery for margin clearance (10% vs. 21%, P=0.02). There was no significant difference in complications between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Cavity shaving halved the rates of positive margins and reexcision among patients with partial mastectomy. (Funded by the Yale Cancer Center; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01452399.).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Fisher, B., Anderson, S., Bryant, J., Margolese, R. G., Deutsch, M., Fisher, E. R., Jeong, J.-H., & Wolmark, N. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa022152 · Cited by 6,249
Cited by
Wong, T. T. W., Zhang, R., Hai, P., Zhang, C., Pleitez, M. A., Aft, R. L., Novack, D. V., & Wang, L. V. (2017) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1602168 · Cited by 285
Allocation concealment in randomised controlled trials: are we getting better?: Table 1
Clark, L., Fairhurst, C., & Torgerson, D. J. (2016) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.i5663 · Cited by 60
Metadata
- Authors
- Chagpar, A. B., Killelea, B. K., Tsangaris, T. N., Butler, M., Stavris, K., Li, F., Yao, X., Bossuyt, V., Harigopal, M., Lannin, D. R., Pusztai, L., & Horowitz, N. R.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2015-08-06
- Volume
- 373
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 503-510
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W654855687
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 13.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Cavity Shave Margins in Breast Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1504473
- The paper
- Chagpar, A. B., Killelea, B. K., Tsangaris, T. N., Butler, M., Stavris, K., Li, F., Yao, X., Bossuyt, V., Harigopal, M., Lannin, D. R., Pusztai, L., & Horowitz, N. R. (2015). A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Cavity Shave Margins in Breast Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1504473
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.