Comparative Effectiveness of Single Versus Dual Adjuvant Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Hormone Receptor-Positive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study
- 1Department of Breast Surgery, Quanzhou First Hospital Affiliated to Fujian Medical University, Quanzhou 362000, China
Abstract
Background/Objectives: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of single versus dual adjuvant treatment strategies for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective study. We retrospectively identified 645 patients with HR+ DCIS who underwent BCS between 2009 and 2020 from the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Breast Cancer Database (SJTU-BCDB). Patients were stratified according to adjuvant treatment regimens: BCS alone, BCS combined with radiotherapy (BCS + RT), BCS combined with endocrine therapy (BCS + ET), and BCS combined with radiotherapy and endocrine therapy (BCS + RT + ET). The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Multivariable Cox regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses were performed to evaluate treatment associations with RFS outcomes. Results: The median follow-up was 74.0 months. In multivariable Cox regression, compared with BCS + RT + ET, neither BCS + RT (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.12–3.13; p = 0.564) nor BCS + ET (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.43–5.11; p = 0.525) showed a statistically significant difference in RFS. IPTW-adjusted analyses similarly showed no statistically significant differences between BCS + RT and BCS + RT + ET (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.06–1.44; p = 0.128) or between BCS + ET and BCS + RT + ET (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 0.49–6.82; p = 0.373). Conclusions: Among patients with HR+ DCIS undergoing BCS, no statistically significant difference in RFS was observed between dual-modality and single-modality adjuvant therapy. However, the limited number of events and wide confidence intervals limit the precision of estimates regarding the incremental benefit of combined RT and ET. Larger prospective studies with adequate statistical power are warranted to further define the comparative effectiveness of these treatment strategies.
Related
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Etelcalcetide and Cinacalcet in Hemodialysis Patients with Secondary Hyperparathyroidism: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study
- Comparative effectiveness of total thyroidectomy versus hemithyroidectomy for low-risk differentiated thyroid cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching.
- Comparative effectiveness of neoadjuvant treatment strategies and predictors of pathological complete response in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a real-world retrospective cohort study
- Treatment patterns and oncologic outcomes of breast-conserving surgery: a multicenter real-world retrospective cohort study in Zhejiang, China.
- Effectiveness and Patient Compliance of a Needle-Free Injection System in Controlled Ovarian Stimulation in IVF Cycles: A Real-World, Investigator-Initiated, Retrospective, Multicenter, Observational Study
BibTeX
@article{huang2026comparative,
title = {{Comparative Effectiveness of Single Versus Dual Adjuvant Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Hormone Receptor-Positive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study}},
author = {Yuqiang Huang and Xianqiang Du and Junjing Li and Debo Chen},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15218729},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8729},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Comparative Effectiveness of Single Versus Dual Adjuvant Therapy After Breast-Conserving Surgery in Hormone Receptor-Positive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study
AU - Yuqiang Huang
AU - Xianqiang Du
AU - Junjing Li
AU - Debo Chen
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/09
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15218729
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/21/8729
AB - Background/Objectives: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of single versus dual adjuvant treatment strategies for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective study. We retrospectively identified 645 patients with HR+ DCIS who underwent BCS between 2009 and 2020 from the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Breast Cancer Database (SJTU-BCDB). Patients were stratified according to adjuvant treatment regimens: BCS alone, BCS combined with radiotherapy (BCS + RT), BCS combined with endocrine therapy (BCS + ET), and BCS combined with radiotherapy and endocrine therapy (BCS + RT + ET). The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Multivariable Cox regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses were performed to evaluate treatment associations with RFS outcomes. Results: The median follow-up was 74.0 months. In multivariable Cox regression, compared with BCS + RT + ET, neither BCS + RT (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.12–3.13; p = 0.564) nor BCS + ET (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.43–5.11; p = 0.525) showed a statistically significant difference in RFS. IPTW-adjusted analyses similarly showed no statistically significant differences between BCS + RT and BCS + RT + ET (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.06–1.44; p = 0.128) or between BCS + ET and BCS + RT + ET (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 0.49–6.82; p = 0.373). Conclusions: Among patients with HR+ DCIS undergoing BCS, no statistically significant difference in RFS was observed between dual-modality and single-modality adjuvant therapy. However, the limited number of events and wide confidence intervals limit the precision of estimates regarding the incremental benefit of combined RT and ET. Larger prospective studies with adequate statistical power are warranted to further define the comparative effectiveness of these treatment strategies.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -