Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Anticancer Research · October 1, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Background/Aim: The optimal management of close resection margins after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) remains controversial, particularly in hormone receptor-negative (HR−) breast cancer, which has a relatively high risk of local recurrence (LR). This study evaluated the association between resection margin width and LR and identified high-risk factors among patients with close margins. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 842 patients with HR− breast cancer who underwent BCS followed by adjuvant radiotherapy between 2010 and 2020. Resection margins were categorized as clear (≥2 mm) or close (<2 mm). The cumulative incidence of LR was analyzed using competing-risk methods, and disease-free survival (DFS) was also evaluated. Results: The 10-year cumulative incidences of LR were 4.5% in patients with clear margins and 4.9% in those with close margins, with no significant difference between the groups (p=0.359). In contrast, the 10-year disease-free survival was significantly lower in patients with close margins than in those with clear margins (87.7% vs. 92.2%; p=0.008), and close margins remained independently associated with worse DFS in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio=1.85, 95% confidence interval=1.13–3.05; p=0.015). In the multivariable analysis of patients with close margins who were treated with a tumor bed boost of 0 to 10 Gy, the presence of an extensive intraductal component (p<0.001), a Ki-67 proliferation index ≥15% (p=0.012), and the omission of HER2-targeted therapy or chemotherapy (p=0.010) were significantly associated with an increased cumulative incidence of LR. Conclusion: Close margins were not associated with a significantly increased risk of LR in patients with HR− breast cancer treated with contemporary adjuvant therapy, although they were associated with worse DFS. Patients with close margins and additional adverse factors may represent a subgroup in whom intensified local treatment, including a higher tumor bed boost dose, warrants further investigation.