Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 894

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17.

Fisher, B, Dignam, J, Wolmark, N, Mamounas, E, Costantino, J, Poller, W, Fisher, E R, Wickerham, D L, Deutsch, M, Margolese, R, Dimitrov, N, Kavanah, M·1998·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: In 1993, findings from a National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) trial to evaluate the worth of radiation therapy after lumpectomy concluded that the combination was more beneficial than lumpectomy alone for localized intraductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS). This report extends those findings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women (N = 818) with localized DCIS were randomly assigned to lumpectomy or lumpectomy plus radiation (50 Gy). Tissue was removed so that resected specimen margins were histologically tumor-free. Mean follow-up time was 90 months (range, 67 to 130). Size and method of tumor detection were determined by central clinical, mammographic, and pathologic assessment. Life-table estimates of event-free survival and survival, average annual rates of occurrence for specific events, relative risks for event-specific end points, and cumulative probability of specific events comprising event-free survival are presented. RESULTS: The benefit of lumpectomy plus radiation was virtually unchanged between 5 and 8 years of follow-up and was due to a reduction in invasive and noninvasive ipsilateral breast tumors (IBTs). Incidence of locoregional and distant events remained similar in both treatment groups; deaths were only infrequently related to breast cancer. Incidence of noninvasive IBT was reduced from 13.4% to 8.2% (P = .007), and of invasive IBT, from 13.4% to 3.9% (P < .0001). All cohorts benefited from radiation regardless of clinical or mammographic tumor characteristics. CONCLUSION: Through 8 years of follow-up, our findings continue to indicate that lumpectomy plus radiation is more beneficial than lumpectomy alone for women with localized, mammographically detected DCIS. When evaluated according to the mammographic characteristics of their DCIS, all groups benefited from radiation.

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 · 10.1200/jco.1998.16.2.441

Cites

10 of 10 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 10 references

Cited by

See all 894

Metadata

Authors
Fisher, B., Dignam, J., Wolmark, N., Mamounas, E., Costantino, J., Poller, W., Fisher, E. R., Wickerham, D. L., Deutsch, M., Margolese, R., Dimitrov, N., & Kavanah, M.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
1998-02
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
441-452
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1923770335
Cited by
894
References
10
FWCI
19.56
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: Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1998.16.2.441
The paper
Fisher, B., Dignam, J., Wolmark, N., Mamounas, E., Costantino, J., Poller, W., Fisher, E. R., Wickerham, D. L., Deutsch, M., Margolese, R., Dimitrov, N., & Kavanah, M. (1998). Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1998.16.2.441

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.