The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Relationship of patient age to pathologic features of the tumor and prognosis for patients with stage I or II breast cancer.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This analysis was performed to clarify the relationship of young age at diagnosis to the pathologic features of the tumor and prognosis in patients with early-stage breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 1,398 patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging stage I or II breast cancer treated by breast-conserving therapy between 1968 and 1985. One hundred seven patients were younger than 35 years at the time of diagnosis. The median follow-up duration for the 1,032 survivors was 99 months. RESULTS: Patients younger than 35 years had a significantly higher overall recurrence rate (P = .002), as well as a greater risk for developing distant metastases (P = .03), when compared with older patients. The cancers in younger patients more commonly showed factors associated with a worse prognosis (including grade 3 histology, lymphatic vessel invasion [LVI], necrosis, and estrogen receptor [ER] negativity) as compared with older patients. In a proportional hazards model that included clinical and treatment-related variables, as well as these pathologic features, age younger than 35 years remained a significant predictor for time to recurrence (relative risk [RR], 1.70), time to distant failure (RR, 1.60), and overall mortality (RR, 1.50). CONCLUSION: Breast cancer patients younger than 35 years have a worse prognosis than older patients. This difference is only partially explained by a higher frequency of adverse pathologic factors seen in younger patients.
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
Asymptotically Efficient Rank Invariant Test Procedures
Peto, R., & Peto, J. (1972) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2344317 · Cited by 3,393
Cited by
American Cancer Society Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening: Update 2003
Smith, R. A., Saslow, D., Andrews Sawyer, K., Burke, W., Costanza, M. E., Evans, W. P., Foster, R. S., Hendrick, E., Eyre, H. J., & Sener, S. (2003) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/canjclin.53.3.141 · Cited by 770
Gnerlich, J. L., Deshpande, A. D., Jeffe, D. B., Sweet, A., White, N., & Margenthaler, J. A. (2009) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.12.001 · Cited by 441
Younger women with breast carcinoma have a poorer prognosis than older women
Chung, M., Chang, H. R., Bland, K. I., & Wanebo, H. J. (1996) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19960101)77:1<97::aid-cncr16>3.0.co;2-3 · Cited by 382
Young age: an independent risk factor for disease-free survival in women with operable breast cancer
Han, W., Kim, S. W., Ae Park, I., Kang, D., Kim, S.-W., Youn, Y.-K., Oh, S. K., Choe, K. J., & Noh, D.-Y. (2004) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/1471-2407-4-82 · Cited by 259
Arriagada, R., Lê, M. G., Guinebretière, J.-M., Dunant, A., Rochard, F., & Tursz, T. (2003) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdg452 · Cited by 179
Metadata
- Authors
- Nixon, A. J., Neuberg, D., Hayes, D. F., Gelman, R., Connolly, J. L., Schnitt, S., Abner, A., Recht, A., Vicini, F., & Harris, J. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 1994-05
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 888-894
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W1961978963
- Cited by
- 579
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.15
- 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: Relationship of patient age to pathologic features of the tumor and prognosis for patients with stage I or II breast cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1994.12.5.888
- The paper
- Nixon, A. J., Neuberg, D., Hayes, D. F., Gelman, R., Connolly, J. L., Schnitt, S., Abner, A., Recht, A., Vicini, F., & Harris, J. R. (1994). Relationship of patient age to pathologic features of the tumor and prognosis for patients with stage I or II breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1994.12.5.888
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.