ArticleScientific reports2025
Survival impact of adjuvant radiotherapy in early stage low risk elderly male breast cancer patients treated with breast conserving surgery.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our study aimed to evaluate the survival impact of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in elderly male patients with early-stage, low-risk breast cancer (node-negative, HR+), and to identify RT-benefiting subgroups using machine learning and causal inference approaches. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2000-2021), including 360 patients after propensity score matching (PSM). Patients were grouped by RT and non-RT (NRT) status, and a 1:3 nearest neighbor PSM was applied. Overall survival (OS), relative survival (RS), standardized mortality ratio (SMR), and transformed Cox regression were used to estimate RT benefit. Additionally, machine learning models, including random forest, support vector machines and causal forest model, were applied for survival prediction and validation. In early-stage, low-risk male breast cancer (MBC) patients treated with BCS, adjuvant RT did not demonstrate a significant survival advantage over NRT. After PSM, 15-year OS, RS, and SMR were 31.8%, 15.2%, and 2.14 for RT versus 34.1%, 21.5%, and 2.25 for NRT (p = 0.36, 0.68, and 0.81, respectively). The cumulative incidence of breast cancer-related death (BCRD) and non-BCRD also showed no statistically significant differences between groups (p = 0.06 and 0.75). Machine learning models (Cox, GBM, and XGBoost) confirmed the limited contribution of RT to survival prediction, with the Cox model demonstrating the best discrimination (C-index = 0.713). While RT was associated with a lower risk of death within the first 10 years, its benefit diminished over time. Causal forest analysis revealed notable heterogeneity in treatment effects across subgroups. Patients who were younger, diagnosed earlier, or had stage I disease showed relatively higher estimated benefit from RT, while older patients or those with more recent diagnoses demonstrated attenuated benefit. In elderly, low-risk MBC patients treated with BCS, adjuvant RT was not associated with improved long-term survival. While our findings suggest that RT may be safely omitted in selected individuals, this decision should be made cautiously in the absence of recurrence data. Model-based analyses underscore the importance of tailoring treatment to patient-specific risk profiles. Prospective studies dedicated to MBC are needed to support individualized de-escalation strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.