The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery With Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Open accessAbstract
Background: Controversy exists regarding the optimal negative margin width for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) treated with breast-conserving surgery and whole-breast irradiation (WBRT). Methods: A multidisciplinary consensus panel used a meta-analysis of margin width and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) from a systematic review of 20 studies including 7883 patients and other published literature as the evidence base for consensus. Results: Negative margins halve the risk of IBTR compared with positive margins defined as ink on DCIS. A 2 mm margin minimizes the risk of IBTR compared with smaller negative margins. More widely clear margins do not significantly decrease IBTR compared with 2 mm margins. Negative margins less than 2 mm alone are not an indication for mastectomy, and factors known to impact rates of IBTR should be considered in determining the need for re-excision. Conclusion: The use of a 2 mm margin as the standard for an adequate margin in DCIS treated with WBRT is associated with low rates of IBTR and has the potential to decrease re-excision rates, improve cosmetic outcome, and decrease health care costs. Clinical judgment should be used in determining the need for further surgery in patients with negative margins < 2 mm.
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
Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust
Committee on Standards for Developing Trustworthy Clinical Practice Guidelines, Board on Health Care Services, & Institute of Medicine (2011) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/13058 · Cited by 3,081
Smith, B. D., Arthur, D. W., Buchholz, T. A., Haffty, B. G., Hahn, C. A., Hardenbergh, P. H., Julian, T. B., Marks, L. B., Todor, D. A., Vicini, F. A., et al. (2009) · International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.02.031 · Cited by 872
Self-citationWapnir, I. L., Dignam, J. J., Fisher, B., Mamounas, E. P., Anderson, S. J., Julian, T. B., Land, S. R., Margolese, R. G., Swain, S. M., Costantino, J. P., et al. (2011) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djr027 · Cited by 785
Self-citationBartelink, H., Maingon, P., Poortmans, P., Weltens, C., Fourquet, A., Jager, J., Schinagl, D., Oei, B., Rodenhuis, C., Horiot, J.-C., et al. (2015) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(14)71156-8 · Cited by 685
The Influence of Margin Width on Local Control of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast
Silverstein, M. J., Lagios, M. D., Groshen, S., Waisman, J. R., Lewinsky, B. S., Martino, S., Gamagami, P., & Colburn, W. J. (1999) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199905133401902 · Cited by 673
Overview of the Randomized Trials of Radiotherapy in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast
Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (2010) · JNCI Monographs · doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgq039 · Cited by 672
Bijker, N., Meijnen, P., Peterse, J. L., Bogaerts, J., Van Hoorebeeck, I., Julien, J.-P., Gennaro, M., Rouanet, P., Avril, A., Fentiman, I. S., et al. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.06.1366 · Cited by 663
Breast Cancer Mortality After a Diagnosis of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Narod, S. A., Iqbal, J., Giannakeas, V., Sopik, V., & Sun, P. (2015) · JAMA Oncology · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2510 · Cited by 613
Moran, M. S., Schnitt, S. J., Giuliano, A. E., Harris, J. R., Khan, S. A., Horton, J., Klimberg, S., Chavez-MacGregor, M., Freedman, G., Houssami, N., et al. (2014) · Annals of Surgical Oncology · doi:10.1245/s10434-014-3481-4 · Cited by 612
Self-citationHoughton, J. (2003) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(03)13859-7 · Cited by 599
Cited by
Harbeck, N., Penault-Llorca, F., Cortes, J., Gnant, M., Houssami, N., Poortmans, P., Ruddy, K., Tsang, J., & Cardoso, F. (2019) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-019-0111-2 · Cited by 3,024
Self-citationEarly breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
Cardoso, F., Kyriakides, S., Ohno, S., Penault-Llorca, F., Poortmans, P., Rubio, I. T., Zackrisson, S., & Senkus, E. (2019) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz173 · Cited by 2,214
Curigliano, G., Burstein, H. J., Winer, E. P., Gnant, M., Dubsky, P., Loibl, S., Colleoni, M., Regan, M. M., Piccart-Gebhart, M., Senn, H.-J., et al. (2017) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdx308 · Cited by 1,205
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Morrow, M., Van Zee, K. J., Solin, L. J., Houssami, N., Chavez-MacGregor, M., Harris, J. R., Horton, J., Hwang, S., Johnson, P. L., Marinovich, M. L., Schnitt, S. J., Wapnir, I., & Moran, M. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2016-11-20
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 33
- Pages
- 4040-4046
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2514536911
- Cited by
- 386
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 16.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery With Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2016.68.3573
- The paper
- Morrow, M., Van Zee, K. J., Solin, L. J., Houssami, N., Chavez-MacGregor, M., Harris, J. R., Horton, J., Hwang, S., Johnson, P. L., Marinovich, M. L., Schnitt, S. J., Wapnir, I., & Moran, M. S. (2016). Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery With Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2016.68.3573
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.
