ライフサイエンスコーパス: breast conservation

1 er (BC) can downstage disease and facilitate breast conservation.

2 reast event even among patients eligible for breast conservation.

3 underutilized in eligible patients desiring breast conservation.

4 evidence suggesting no survival benefit over breast conservation.

5 f tumor size to breast size may still permit breast conservation.

6 n is indicated for all patients treated with breast conservation.

7 kelihood of adjuvant radiation therapy after breast conservation.

8 All women were clinically eligible for breast conservation.

9 evidence suggesting no survival benefit over breast conservation.

10 nts with breast cancer have some options for breast conservation.

11 2.12 (P = 0.008)]; re-excision after initial breast conservation 10.9% versus 18.0% [OR, 0.56 (P = 0.

12 3.06 (P < 0.001)]; re-excision after initial breast conservation 11.6% versus 11.4% [OR, 1.02 (P = 0.

13 (41%, P =.004), and fewer patients underwent breast conservation (36%, P =.036).

14 This breast-conservation accelerated hyperfractionation radia

15 The success of breast conservation after preoperative chemotherapy depe

16 mary chemotherapy offers a greater chance of breast conservation (although no survival advantage), an

17 C, with 28% of patients being candidates for breast conservation and a 5-year overall survival rate o

18 rted cosmetic satisfaction was similar after breast conservation and after mastectomy with reconstruc

19 Patients having breast conservation and mastectomies had adjusted median

20 cinoma in situ and in invasive cancers after breast conservation and mastectomy.

21 uctal carcinoma in situ to considerations in breast conservation and prevention is highlighted.

22 A breast conservation and radiation regimen has significan

23 cremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing breast conservation and radiation to mastectomy was $219

24 ents who develop breast recurrence following breast conservation and SLN biopsy.

25 ed SLN metastatic breast cancer treated with breast conservation and systemic therapy, the use of SLN

26 eoperative MRI, and unsuccessful attempts at breast conservation, are associated with increased rates

27 hould be taken into account when considering breast conservation as a treatment option.

28 Women who preferred breast conservation but received mastectomy had the poor

29 mammoplasty technique is a viable option for breast conservation even for larger tumors, combining a

30 st benefit from the addition of radiation in breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

31 in the risk of recurrence has been shown in breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ and in

32 t-sided irradiation in patients treated with breast conservation for early-stage breast cancer who su

33 de biopsy increased more than twofold in the breast conservation group (an average of 23% in 1998 ver

34 Women who received breast conservation had better body image 2 years after

35 e favorable tumors, were more likely to have breast conservation, had a lower median predicted risk o

36 As breast conservation has increasingly substituted mastect

37 with left-sided radiation as a component of breast conservation have an increased risk of late, radi

38 urgery, can greatly increase the options for breast conservation in complex cancer cases.

39 r, a higher percentage of patients underwent breast conservation in the breast surgeon period than in

40 pared with no surgery in patients undergoing breast conservation in women with predominantly small, e

41 tients with breast cancer, particularly when breast conservation is contemplated.

42 Although breast conservation is therapeutically equivalent to mas

43 Efforts to optimize breast conservation, minimize unnecessary tests, and imp

44 ugh the definitive procedure, whether it was breast conservation or mastectomy.

45 Compared with patients who chose breast conservation or unilateral mastectomy, those who

46 s paclitaxel (15.7%; P = .02), with improved breast conservation rates (P = .05).

47 ble breast cancer allows a small increase in breast conservation rates and has significant potential

48 able breast cancer has been shown to improve breast conservation rates as a result of tumor response

49 vasive breast cancer and potential impact on breast conservation rates.

50 ystemic therapy is effective and can improve breast conservation rates.

51 Opportunities for increasing breast-conservation rates through improved XRT access ex

52 Breast-conservation rates were 30% in the node-negative

53 ropriate imaging guidelines for recommending breast conservation surgery (BCS) after the NAC.

54 y (NET) on the response rate and the rate of breast conservation surgery (BCS) for ER+ breast cancer.

55 of this study was to determine the trend of breast conservation surgery (BCS) in North Carolina over

56 United States are measured on performance of breast conservation surgery (BCS) in the majority of wom

57 For early-stage breast cancer, breast conservation surgery (BCS) is a conservative opti

58 ved unilateral mastectomy and 22.8% received breast conservation surgery (BCS).

59 ted in three patients, two of whom underwent breast conservation surgery (group III).

60 ncreased incidence of local recurrence after breast conservation surgery and radiation therapy.

61 or women with early breast cancer undergoing breast conservation surgery and radiotherapy, there are

62 Local cancer relapse risk after breast conservation surgery followed by radiotherapy has

63 e-fourth of all patients who undergo initial breast conservation surgery for breast cancer will have

64 e effect of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after breast conservation surgery in different breast cancer s

65 of providing a choice between mastectomy and breast conservation surgery is economically attractive w

66 rmore, patients in the NLBx group undergoing breast conservation surgery required re-excision more fr

67 0 to II breast cancer who underwent initial breast conservation surgery were studied.

68 is similar in BRCA1/2 carriers treated with breast conservation surgery who undergo oophorectomy ver

69 Radiotherapy trial between 1991 and 1997 to breast conservation surgery with or without RT.

70 t of CPM (vs either unilateral mastectomy or breast conservation surgery) was significantly associate

71 re is currently no standard margin width for breast conservation surgery.

72 ategorized as CPM, unilateral mastectomy, or breast conservation surgery.

73 ratified by centre, type of primary surgery (breast-conservation surgery or mastectomy), and tumour b

74 Two hundred patients, 112 of whom had breast-conservation surgery with axillary dissection and

75 uction have improved cosmetic outcomes after breast-conservation surgery.

76 ve neoadjuvant induction chemotherapy before breast-conservation surgery.

77 r some women to be successfully treated with breast conservation therapy (BCT ) who were initially co

78 We investigated rates of radiation use after breast conservation therapy (BCT) for patients treated f

79 s done to determine the long-term outcome of breast conservation therapy (BCT) for patients with earl

80 studies that directly compare survival after breast conservation therapy (BCT) vs mastectomy.

81 Breast conservation therapy after neoadjuvant chemothera

82 n, data from a previously published study of breast conservation therapy among women of Ashkenazi des

83 s were selected, including 8108 who received breast conservation therapy and 13,488 who received mast

84 sfaction was similar between those receiving breast conservation therapy and those receiving mastecto

85 TNBC is not a contraindication for breast conservation therapy because data suggest increas

86 Review of special issues in breast conservation therapy demonstrates no benefit to e

87 The long-term efficacy of breast conservation therapy for early breast cancer cont

88 d be obtained in patients who have undergone breast conservation therapy only when considered necessa

89 ce risks (relative to luminal subtypes) with breast conservation therapy or mastectomy.

90 Breast conservation therapy was performed in 310 cases i

91 Breast conservation therapy was used to treat 70% of pat

92 Breast conservation therapy, mastectomy alone, or mastec

93 al surgical resection has been supplanted by breast conservation therapy.

94 7 patients with biopsy-proven ILC undergoing breast-conservation therapy (BCT) at the University of V

95 Whole-breast irradiation, as part of breast-conservation therapy (BCT), has well-established

96 In local recurrence after breast-conservation therapy for DCIS, histopathologic fi

97 al of 447 (7.9%) of 5660 patients undergoing breast-conservation therapy from 1970 to 2005 experience

98 om re-excision to mastectomy (n = 3) or from breast-conservation therapy to mastectomy (n = 1).

99 26 patients with 27 local recurrences after breast-conservation therapy were identified.

100 ts, 11 underwent mastectomy, seven underwent breast-conservation therapy, and one did not undergo a s

101 After breast-conservation therapy, IBTR may be classified into

102 mph node-negative breast cancer treated with breast-conservation therapy.

103 Patients treated with breast conservation, those with 10 or more positive node

104 ith stage I or II breast cancer treated with breast conservation treatment were reviewed.

105 who underwent breast MRI during work-up for breast conservation treatment.

106 ss than 10%) absolute increase in the use of breast-conservation treatment (BCT) with similar rates o

107 umpectomy and whole-breast radiotherapy (ie, breast-conservation treatment) are accepted as viable al

108 ty-five patients (94.9%) achieved successful breast conservation, whereas 4 patients (5.1%) went on t

109 sitivity analysis was based on women who had breast conservation with radiotherapy.