The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impact of Radiotherapy on Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast Reconstruction
Open accessAbstract
Background: Patients considering postmastectomy radiation and reconstruction require information regarding expected outcomes to make preference-concordant decisions. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study of women diagnosed with breast cancer at 11 centers between 2012 and 2015 compared complications and patient-reported outcomes of 622 irradiated and 1625 unirradiated patients who received reconstruction. Patient characteristics and outcomes between irradiated and unirradiated patients were analyzed using ttests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Multivariable mixed-effects regression modelsassessed the impact of reconstruction type and radiotherapy on outcomes after adjusting for relevant covariates. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Autologous reconstruction was more commonly received by irradiated patients (37.9% vs 25.0%, P < .001). Immediate reconstruction was less common in irradiated patients (83.0% vs 95.7%, P < .001). At least one breast complication had occurred by two years in 38.9% of irradiated patients with implant reconstruction, 25.6% of irradiated patients with autologous reconstruction, 21.8% of unirradiated patients with implant reconstruction, and 28.3% of unirradiated patients with autologous reconstruction. Multivariable analysis showed bilateral treatment and higher body mass index to be predictive of developing a complication, with a statistically significant interaction between radiotherapy receipt and reconstruction type. Among irradiated patients, autologous reconstruction was associated with a lower risk of complications than implant-based reconstruction at two years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27 to 0.82, P = .007); no between-procedure difference was found in unirradiated patients. The interaction was also statistically significant for satisfaction with breasts at two years (P = .002), with larger adjusted difference in satisfaction between autologous vs implant approaches (63.5, 95% CI = 55.9 to 71.1, vs 47.7, 95% CI = 40.2 to 55.2, respectively) in irradiated patients than between autologous vs implant approaches (67.6, 95% CI = 60.3 to 74.9, vs 60.5, 95% CI = 53.6 to 67.4) in unirradiated patients. Conclusions: Autologous reconstruction appears to yield superior patient-reported satisfaction and lower risk of complications than implant-based approaches among patients receiving postmastectomy radiotherapy.
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
Overgaard, M., Hansen, P. S., Overgaard, J., Rose, C., Andersson, M., Bach, F., Kjaer, M., Gadeberg, C. C., Mouridsen, H. T., Jensen, M.-B., et al. (1997) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199710023371401 · Cited by 2,554
EBCTCG (Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group) (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60488-8 · Cited by 2,254
Development of a New Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Breast Surgery: The BREAST-Q
Pusic, A. L., Klassen, A. F., Scott, A. M., Klok, J. A., Cordeiro, P. G., & Cano, S. J. (2009) · Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e3181aee807 · Cited by 1,873
Self-citationAdjuvant Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy in Node-Positive Premenopausal Women with Breast Cancer
Ragaz, J., Jackson, S. M., Le, N., Plenderleith, I. H., Spinelli, J. J., Basco, V. E., Wilson, K. S., Knowling, M. A., Coppin, C. M. L., Paradis, M., et al. (1997) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199710023371402 · Cited by 1,745
Overgaard, M., Jensen, M.-B., Overgaard, J., Hansen, P. S., Rose, C., Andersson, M., Kamby, C., Kjaer, M., Gadeberg, C. C., Rasmussen, B. B., et al. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)09201-0 · Cited by 1,602
Al-Ghazal, S. K., Fallowfield, L., & Blamey, R. W. (2000) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/s0959-8049(00)00197-0 · Cited by 655
Rowland, J. H. (2000) · Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/92.17.1422 · Cited by 583
Wilkins, E. G., Cederna, P. S., Lowery, J. C., Davis, J. A., Kim, H. M., Roth, R. S., Goldfarb, S., Izenberg, P. H., Houin, H. P., & Shaheen, K. W. (2000) · Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/00006534-200010000-00010 · Cited by 461
Self-citationJagsi, R., Jiang, J., Momoh, A. O., Alderman, A., Giordano, S. H., Buchholz, T. A., Kronowitz, S. J., & Smith, B. D. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2013.52.2284 · Cited by 442
Self-citationKrueger, E. A., Wilkins, E. G., Strawderman, M., Cederna, P., Goldfarb, S., Vicini, F. A., & Pierce, L. J. (2001) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/s0360-3016(00)01402-4 · Cited by 386
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Jagsi, R., Momoh, A. O., Qi, J., Hamill, J. B., Billig, J., Kim, H. M., Pusic, A. L., & Wilkins, E. G.
- Venue
- JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2017-09-13
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 157-165
- ISSN
- 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2105
- OpenAlex
- W2755931745
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 20.21
- 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: Impact of Radiotherapy on Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast Reconstruction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/djx148
- The paper
- Jagsi, R., Momoh, A. O., Qi, J., Hamill, J. B., Billig, J., Kim, H. M., Pusic, A. L., & Wilkins, E. G. (2018). Impact of Radiotherapy on Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast Reconstruction. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx148
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.