The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: A Systematic Review of Incidence, Treatment, and Outcomes
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health Office of Medical Applications of Research commissioned a structured literature review on the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) as a background article for the State of the Science Conference on Diagnosis and Management of DCIS. METHODS: Published studies were identified and abstracted from MEDLINE and other sources. We include articles published between 1965 and January 31, 2009; 374 publications were identified that addressed DCIS incidence, staging, treatment, and outcomes in adult women. RESULTS: In the United States, DCIS incidence rose from 1.87 per 100 000 in 1973-1975 to 32.5 in 2004. Incidence increased in all ages but more so in women older than 50 years. Increased use of mammography explains some but not all of the increased incidence. Risk factors for incident DCIS include older age and family history. Although tamoxifen treatment prevented both invasive breast cancer and DCIS, raloxifene treatment decreased incidence of invasive breast cancer but not DCIS. Among patients with DCIS, magnetic resonance imaging was more sensitive than mammography for detecting multicentric disease and estimating tumor size. Because about 15% of patients with DCIS identified on core needle biopsy are diagnosed with invasive breast cancer after excision or mastectomy, the accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy after excision is relevant to surgical management of DCIS. Most studies demonstrated that sentinel lymph node biopsy is feasible after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Younger age, positive surgical margins, tumor size and grade, and comedo necrosis were consistently related to DCIS recurrence. DCIS outcomes after either mastectomy or BCS plus radiation therapy were superior to BCS alone. Tamoxifen treatment after DCIS diagnosis reduced risk of recurrent disease. CONCLUSIONS: Scientific questions deserving further investigation include the relationship between mammography use and DCIS incidence and whether imaging technologies and treatment guidelines can be modified to focus on lesions that are most likely to become clinically problematic.
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
Chlebowski, R. T., Hendrix, S. L., Langer, R. D., Stefanick, M. L., Gass, M., Lane, D., Rodabough, R. J., Gilligan, M. A., Cyr, M. G., Thomson, C. A., et al. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.24.3243 · Cited by 1,872
Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials
Nyström, L., Andersson, I., Bjurstam, N., Frisell, J., Nordenskjöld, B., & Rutqvist, L. E. (2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08020-0 · Cited by 1,183
MRI Evaluation of the Contralateral Breast in Women with Recently Diagnosed Breast Cancer
Lehman, C. D., Gatsonis, C., Kuhl, C. K., Hendrick, R. E., Pisano, E. D., Hanna, L., Peacock, S., Smazal, S. F., Maki, D. D., Julian, T. B., et al. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa065447 · Cited by 945
Fisher, B., Costantino, J., Redmond, C., Fisher, E., Margolese, R., Dimitrov, N., Wolmark, N., Wickerham, D. L., Deutsch, M., Ore, L., et al. (1993) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199306033282201 · Cited by 827
Clarke, M. J., Collins, R., Davies, C., Godwin, J., Gray, R. G., & Peto, R. (2000) · The Lancet · Cited by 824
(2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)09962-2 · Cited by 747
Martino, S., Cauley, J. A., Barrett-Connor, E., Powles, T. J., Mershon, J., Disch, D., Secrest, R. J., Cummings, S. R., & For the CORE Investigators (2004) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djh319 · Cited by 684
Cited by
Multiclonal Invasion in Breast Tumors Identified by Topographic Single Cell Sequencing
Casasent, A. K., Schalck, A., Gao, R., Sei, E., Long, A., Pangburn, W., Casasent, T., Meric-Bernstam, F., Edgerton, M. E., & Navin, N. E. (2018) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.12.007 · Cited by 411
Carreira, H., Williams, R., Müller, M., Harewood, R., Stanway, S., & Bhaskaran, K. (2018) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djy177 · Cited by 416
Cancer cell survival during detachment from the ECM: multiple barriers to tumour progression
Buchheit, C. L., Weigel, K. J., & Schafer, Z. T. (2014) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc3789 · Cited by 367
Impact of Epithelial–Stromal Interactions on Peritumoral Fibroblasts in Ductal Carcinoma in Situ
Strell, C., Paulsson, J., Jin, S.-B., Tobin, N. P., Mezheyeuski, A., Roswall, P., Mutgan, C., Mitsios, N., Johansson, H., Wickberg, S. M., et al. (2019) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djy234 · Cited by 158
Metadata
- Authors
- Virnig, B. A., Tuttle, T. M., Shamliyan, T., & Kane, R. L.
- Venue
- JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-01-13
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 170-178
- ISSN
- 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2105
- OpenAlex
- W2126212561
- Cited by
- 608
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 2.53
- 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: Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: A Systematic Review of Incidence, Treatment, and Outcomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/djp482
- The paper
- Virnig, B. A., Tuttle, T. M., Shamliyan, T., & Kane, R. L. (2010). Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: A Systematic Review of Incidence, Treatment, and Outcomes. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djp482
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.