This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

RICHARD A. EVANS, MD
Houston

Arch Surg. 1988;123(7):913-914.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—For more than 15 years the Guy's Hospital trials have been providing valuable information on breast-preserving surgery in the treatment of cancer. Hayward and Caleffil recently analyzed 630 patients treated in two series by either radical mastectomy or wide excision and suboptimal radiation therapy. They reported that among patients with clinical stage I disease with T1 lesions, radical mastectomy provided a significantly better prognosis than wide excision. Among patients with larger tumors, there was no survival advantage with radical surgery. This conflicts with the more traditional view expressed in the same issue of the ARCHIVES by Maddox et al²: "Patients with more advanced disease substantially benefit from a more comprehensive operation." Hayward and Caleffi offered no explanation for their perplexing results.

I believe that the study by Tartter et al³ helps resolve these conflicting conclusions. They demonstrated a strong correlation between low preoperative natural killer . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?