Table 16Association between necrosis and patient outcomes

Included TreatmentsAuthor, YearNumber of WomenEstimate/DesignMonths of FollowupPresence of NecrosisRelative Measure of the Association (95% CI)
All Cause Mortality
LRSolin, 199332581OR/Observational study84Yes vs. no0.54 (0.072; 4.051)
LRSolin, 1993325120OR/Observational study84Intermediate vs. no0.303 (0.041; 2.257)
Any Recurrence
LOttesen, 1992301112OR/Observational study53Yes vs. no5.649 (2.139; 14.915)
SSMCarlson, 2007348170OR/Observational study82.3Yes vs. no4.071 (0.507; 32.717)
M, LR, LT, LRT, or LStallard, 2001358151OR/Observational study132Yes vs. no1.087 (0.337; 3.513)
Breast Cancer mortality
LRSolin, 199332581OR/Observational study84Yes vs. no1.12 (0.097; 12.91)
LRSolin, 1993325120OR/Observational study84Intermediate vs. no0.311 (0.019; 5.137)
Contralateral DCIS
LOttesen, 2000337168**OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no0.503 (0.024; 10.677)
LOttesen, 2000337142*OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no0.394 (0.019; 8.366)
Contralateral DCIS or Invasive
LR or LAdepoju, 2006345310OR/Observational study103.2Yes vs. no1.327 (0.396; 4.442)
LOttesen, 2000337142*OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no1.011 (0.089; 11.441)
LOttesen, 2000337168**OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no0.855 (0.087; 8.433)
Contralateral Invasive
LOttesen, 2000337142*OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no6.161 (0.246; 154.175)
LOttesen, 2000337168**OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no2.609 (0.16; 42.584)
Distant Metastasis
LRSolin, 199332581OR/Observational study60Yes vs. no1.766 (0.07; 44.288)
LRSolin, 1993325120OR/Observational study60Intermediate vs. no0.918 (0.036; 23.749)
Local DCIS
LOttesen, 2000337168**OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no3.583 (1.564; 8.204)
LOttesen, 2000337142*OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no3.58 (1.488; 8.614)
M, LR, or LInnos, 200836423,547IRR/Observational study55Yes vs. no1.63 (1.11; 2.37)
L, LR, LT, or LRTChan, 2001329114OR/Observational study47Yes vs. no1.551 (0.443; 5.435)
LFish, 199832788OR/Observational study60Yes vs. no0.878 (0.289; 2.671)
L, LR, LT, or LRTWarren, 20053161,103OR/Observational study91Yes vs. no0.8 (0.48; 1.33)
L, LR, LT, or LRTChan, 2001329164OR/Observational study47Intermediate vs. no2.204 (0.809; 6.004)
Local DCIS or Invasive Carcinoma
M, MR, L, LRSchouten van der Velden, 2007315798HR/Observational study59Yes vs. no9.3 (3.3; 25.9)
LRBijker, 2001357247OR/Randomized control trial64.8Yes vs. no4.974 (1.654; 14.959)
LMacDonald, 2005320445RR/Observational study57Yes vs. no3.81 (2.1; 6.93)
LCornfield, 2004343151OR/Observational study65Yes vs. no3.3 (1.5; 7.2)
LRRodrigues, 2002360230OR/Observational study98.4Yes vs. no3.238 (1.152; 9.1)
LOttesen, 2000337168HR/Observational study120Yes vs. no2.3 (1.1; 4.8)
LRT or LRFisher, 20013241,804RR/Randomized control trial83Yes vs. no1.82 (1.33; 2.47)
LR or LFisher, 1999295818RR/Randomized control trial102Yes vs. no1.72 (1.23; 2.41)
LWarneke, 199536919OR/Observational study43Yes vs. no7 (0.312; 157.266)
LKestin, 200037528OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no6.611 (0.475; 91.953)
LRWarneke, 199536921OR/Observational study43Yes vs. no2.385 (0.043; 133.568)
SSMCarlson, 2007348170OR/Observational study82.3Yes vs. no2.359 (0.276; 20.137)
LR or LVan Zee, 1999335122OR/Observational study72Yes vs. no2.035 (0.722; 5.735)
LCornfield, 2004343151OR/Observational study65Yes vs. no1.964 (0.916; 4.212)
L, LR, LT, or LRTChan, 2001329114OR/Observational study47Yes vs. no1.616 (0.504; 5.181)
LBijker, 2001357239OR/Randomized control trial64.8Yes vs. no1.302 (0.674; 2.518)
LR or LOmlin, 2006312373HR/Observational study72Yes vs. no1.282 (2.326; 0.694)
LMacDonald, 2005320445RR/Observational study57Yes vs. no1.16 (0.52; 2.59)
LRVicini, 2000298148OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no1.075 (0.338; 3.424)
MWarneke, 199536960OR/Observational study43Yes vs. no1.068 (0.021; 55.569)
L, LR, LT, or LRTWarren, 20053161,103HR/Observational study91Yes vs. no0.9 (0.63; 1.3)
LRGoldstein, 200037089OR/Observational study84Yes vs. no0.79 (0.184; 3.393)
LRSahoo, 2005311103HR/Observational study63Yes vs. no0.7 (0.16; 3.06)
LRSolin, 199630695OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no0.562 (0.182; 1.741)
L or LRNeuschatz, 2001339109OR/Observational study60Yes vs. no0.27 (0.066; 1.109)
L, LR, LT, or LRTChan, 2001329164OR/Observational study47Intermediate vs. no2.488 (0.983; 6.298)
LRGoldstein, 200037098OR/Observational study84Intermediate vs. no0.838 (0.221; 3.177)
LRSolin, 1996306127OR/Observational study120Intermediate vs. no0.717 (0.258; 1.991)
LR or LVan Zee, 199933572OR/Observational study72Intermediate vs. no0.696 (0.082; 5.882)
LR or LAdepoju, 2006345310OR/Observational study103.20.664 (0.311; 1.42)
Local Invasive Carcinoma
LOttesen, 2000337142*OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no3.729 (1.404; 9.903)
LOttesen, 2000337168**OR/Observational study120Yes vs. no2.848 (1.191; 6.815)
M, LR, or LInnos, 200836423,547IRR/Observational study55Yes vs. no1.93 (1.28; 2.91)
L, LR, LT, or LRTChan, 2001329114OR/Observational study47Yes vs. no1.8 (0.11; 29.561)
L, LR, LT, or LRTWarren, 20053161,103OR/Observational study91Yes vs. no1.45 (0.83; 2.51)
L, LR, LT, or LRTChan, 2001329164OR/Observational study47Intermediate vs. no3.31 (0.362; 30.281)
Local or Contralateral Invasive
LMiller, 200132888OR/Observational study60 for L and 80.4 for MYes vs. no0.841 (0.225; 3.143)

Bold = Statistically significant

Multivariate adjusted;

*

without microinvasion;

**

with microinvasion

L=Lumpectomy; M=Mastectomy; R=Radiation; SSM=Skin Sparing Mastectomy; T=Tamoxifen

Multivariate adjusted;

without microinvasion;

with microinvasion

From: 3, Results

Cover of Diagnosis and Management of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS)
Diagnosis and Management of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS).
Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 185.
Virnig BA, Shamliyan T, Tuttle TM, et al.

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.