Loading
Life sciences · Observational Study
ClinicalTrials.gov · September 15, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Observational Study.
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.
Registry record from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05559411). This is a study registration, not published results. Lead sponsor: European Breast Cancer Research Association of Surgical Trialists. Recruitment status: RECRUITING. Study type: OBSERVATIONAL. Enrollment: 7416 participants (ESTIMATED). Conditions: Breast Cancer. Primary outcome measures: Rate of intended target lesion and/or marker removal, independent of margin status on final histopathology (number of study participants with intended target lesion and/or marker removal, divided by the number of all study participants) , 2 years; Negative resection margin rates (defined as lesion removal with no invasive or non-invasive carcinoma on ink) at first surgery , 2 years. Brief summary: In the last decades, the proportion of breast cancer (BC) patients receiving breast-conserving surgery has increased steadily, reaching 70-80% in developed countries. Since positive resection margins are strongly associated with local recurrence risk, the goal of breast surgery is the complete tumor removal and most national and international guidelines recommend re-operation, either in form of re-excision or mastectomy, until clear margins have been reached. Re-operation rates vary widely, with population-based studies reporting a range of 15-35%, and the necessity for a second surgery can lead to increased patient anxiety, a delay in start of adjuvant treatment, worse cosmetic outcome and increased complication rates and costs. Therefore, re-operation rate has been included as a quality indicator in several countries. Several imaging-guided techniques have been developed to guide removal of non-palpable breast lesions, the oldest one being preoperative wire placement under ultrasound or mammographic guidance, usually followed by radiography or ultrasound of removed tissue. Newer techniques, such as intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS), radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL), radioactive seed localization (RSL), radar reflector-localization (RRL), magnetic seed localization (MSL), and radiofrequency identification (RFID) tags have been introduced as an alternative to wire-guided localization (WGL). To date, comparative data on the rates of successful lesion removal, negative margins, re-operation rate and patient's comfort depending on the localization technique used are limited. Further, since some of these studies were funded by the manufacturer of the marker examined, a potential bias cannot be excluded. In the vast majority of the available studies, the patient's perspective with regard to discomfort and pain level has not been evaluated. The aim of the proposed study is to comparatively evaluate different imaging-guided localization methods used for surgical removal of malignant breast lesions with regard to oncological safety and patient-reported outcomes.