Clinical practice guidelines for prognosis and follow-up of early-stage breast cancer patients: Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) practice guidelines (2026 edition) Chinese Society of Breast Surgery, Chinese Society of Surgery, Chinese Medical Association
Clinical Practice Guideline

Clinical practice guidelines for prognosis and follow-up of early-stage breast cancer patients: Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) practice guidelines (2026 edition) Chinese Society of Breast Surgery, Chinese Society of Surgery, Chinese Medical Association

Jia Wang1#, Dianlong Zhang1#, Yuting Zhang1, Nan Wu1, Hao Yu1, Yufu Guan1, Zhimin Fan2, Yinhua Liu3, Feng Jin4

1Department of Breast and Thyroid Surgery, Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, China; 2Department of Breast Surgery, General Surgery Center, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China; 3Department of Breast Disease, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China; 4Department of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China

Contributions: (I) Conception and design: J Wang, D Zhang, F Jin; (II) Administrative support: Z Fan, Y Liu, F Jin; (III) Provision of study materials or patients: None; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: Y Zhang, N Wu, H Yu, Y Guan; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: J Wang, D Zhang; (VI) Manuscript writing: All authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: All authors.

#These authors contributed equally to this work.

Correspondence to: Feng Jin, PhD. Department of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, 155 Nanjing North Street, Heping District, Shenyang 110001, China. Email: jinfeng@cmu.edu.cn.

Background: Long-term survival in early-stage breast cancer patients has markedly improved, making follow-up an increasingly prolonged phase of care. Accurate prognosis assessment and a scientifically grounded follow-up plan are essential for achieving effective and individualized chronic disease management. This guideline aims to standardize these practices in China.

Methods: The Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) convened a panel of experts. Clinical evidence was assessed according to a modified GRADE system. Recommendations were developed by integrating evidence quality with practical feasibility in the Chinese healthcare setting. A consensus voting committee of 33 breast surgeons graded the recommendation strength (Level A: ≥90% agreement; Level B: 80–89% agreement).

Results: This guideline centers on two core components: prognosis and follow-up. A comprehensive prognosis integrates four domains: patients’ general health, including age, genetic risk, reproductive history, and past medical history; tumor staging and histopathological characteristics; molecular features like subtype, Ki-67, BRCA mutations, and multigene assay results; and treatment factors, notably surgical margin status and adjuvant regimens. Follow-up recommendations visit frequency started with every 3–6 months, then 6–12 months, transitioning to annual lifelong checks, with adjustments based on risk. Evaluations should cover general examination, tumor-related examinations, special examinations, assessment of psychosocial well-being and treatment-related complications. Implementing a structured single-disease database is also advised to support continued care and research.

Conclusions: This guideline provides evidence-based, consensus-driven recommendations for the prognostic evaluation and follow-up of early-stage breast cancer patients in China. Adopting this guideline within a multidisciplinary, patient-centered framework is vital for enhancing long-term survival and quality of life.

Keywords: Breast cancer; prognosis; follow-up; guidelines

Received: 22 October 2025; Accepted: 02 March 2026; Published online: 27 April 2026.

doi: 10.21037/tbcr-2025-1-64

Highlight box

Key recommendations

This guideline proposes a core framework for early breast cancer management, focusing on:

• Integrated prognostic assessment across patients’ general condition, tumor staging, histopathological characteristics, molecular pathology, and treatment plans;

• A follow-up schedule adapted to each patient’s individual recurrence risk, with surveillance frequency adjusted accordingly;

• Follow-up must systematically include concomitant diseases and treatment complications to safeguard overall health and quality of life;

• Establishment of a standardized single-disease database to support whole-process care.

What was recommended and what is new?

• This guideline recommends integrated prognostic assessment and structured follow-up for early breast.

• This guideline builds on existing standards while introducing important updates: incorporating patient factors like menstrual history and psychosocial status into prognostic evaluation; recommending the mutation status of germline BRCA1/2, PIK3CA be included in prognostic follow-up factors; creating unified management protocols for treatment complications and concomitant diseases; and a standardized data collection form designed specifically for Chinese clinical settings.

What is the implication, and what should change now?

• This guideline establishes comprehensive survivorship care as the new standard for follow-up, mandating coordinated attention to four domains: cancer control, treatment-related effects, concomitant diseases, and psychological health.

Introduction

Since the beginning of the 21st century, standardized treatment approaches have significantly improved outcomes for early-stage breast cancer patients. With survival times extending, the follow-up time has also gradually increased. Precise prognostic assessment and a scientific follow-up plan are important components for achieving efficient and accurate full-process chronic disease management. The prognosis evaluation and follow-up of patients with early breast cancer include the general condition of the patient, tumor-related assessments, treatment plans, the formulation of follow-up plans, and individualized care. In order to standardize the prognosis evaluation and follow-up of patients with early breast cancer in China, the Chinese Medical Association’s Surgery Branch organized experts to evaluate the quality of relevant clinical research evidence with reference to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and formulated a clinical practice guideline for prognosis evaluation and follow-up of early breast cancer based on the feasibility of clinical practice in China, aiming to provide a reference for the clinical work of domestic breast specialists. We present this article in accordance with the RIGHT reporting checklist (available at https://tbcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tbcr-2025-1-64/rc).

Methods

Level of evidence standard

The evidence grading approach was derived from the GRADE framework while integrating clinically relevant findings from Chinese patient populations. The levels are classified as category I, II, III, and IV to quantify the evaluation of the reliability of the evidence by experts on the compiling committees. Based on the accessibility of this guideline in clinical practice in China, the expert group prioritized Class I and Class II evidence for inclusion in the guideline evaluation system (Table 1).

Table 1

Level of evidence standard

Level of evidence Standard
I Based on high-level prospective randomized controlled trials, large-sample observational studies or meta-analyses, internationally recognized current guidelines and consensus, guidelines and consensus published by national societies or associations, and studies of the above types based on the Chinese population
II Based on low-level randomized trials or well-designed uncontrolled trials or cohort studies, intercontinental industry association guidelines and international conference expert consensus, guidelines and consensus published by domestic regional societies or associations, and studies of the above types based on the Chinese population
III Based on case-control studies, retrospective studies, guidelines and consensus published by industry associations in various countries and domestic provincial societies or associations, and studies of the above types based on the Chinese population
IV Based on case reports, scientific hypotheses, consensus of experts from various countries and regions, guidelines and consensus published by local societies or associations in China, and studies of the above types based on the Chinese population

Recommendation strength standard

The recommendation strength of this guideline is divided into A-level and B-level recommendations (A-level ≥90% agreement recommendation; B-level ≥80%, <90% agreement recommendation) (Table 2).

Table 2

Recommendation strength

Strength of recommendation Standard assigned by the experts
A-level ≥90% agreement recommendation
B-level ≥80%, <90% agreement recommendation

Recommendation strength review committee

The voting committee for this guideline consisted of 33 members, all of whom were breast surgeons (100%). These experts were selected by the steering committee of Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS), Chinese Society of Surgery and Chinese Medical Association based on their academic authority, clinical expertise from diverse geographic regions and hospital tiers within China, and experiences in guideline development, ensuring a nationally representative and authoritative consensus.

Target audience

Clinicians specializing in breast diseases in China.

Recommendations

The recommendations for prognostic evaluation and follow-up of early-breast cancer are presented in Tables 3,4.

Table 3

Recommendation 1: prognostic evaluation of early breast cancer

Prognostic evaluation indicators Level of evidence Recommended strength
Patients’ general condition I A
   Age (1)
   Family history (2)
   Menstrual, marital and childbearing history (3,4)
   Past medical history (comorbidities, physical and mental health conditions)
Tumor staging I A
   pTNM (ypTNM) staging (5)
Histopathological characteristics I A
   Histological types (6)
   Histological grade (7)
   Lymphovascular invasion (8)
   Evaluation of neoadjuvant therapya (9-11)
Molecular pathological characteristics I A
   Molecular types (5)
   Ki-67 (12)
   Germline BRCA1/2 mutations (13)
   Polygenic risk score: Oncotype DX (14) and MammaPrint (15)
Treatment process I A
   Surgical method (margin status) (16,17)
   (Neo)adjuvant therapy regimens (18)

a, neoadjuvant therapy evaluation refers to Miller & Payne, RCB and TILs standards. pTNM, pathological tumor-node-metastasis; ypTNM, post-neoadjuvant therapy pTNM; RCB, residual tumor burden; TIL, tumor infiltrating lymphocyte.

Table 4

Recommendation 2: follow-up of early-stage breast cancer

Follow-up of early-stage breast cancer Level of evidence Recommended strength
Frequency of follow-up I A
   According to the risk assessment, follow-up examinations are conducted every 3–6 months for the first 3 years after surgery; every 6–12 months for the 4–5 years after surgery; and once a year from the 5th year after surgery to lifelong follow-up (19)
Follow-up examination items (18) I A
   General examination: medical history collection, physical examination, laboratory tests (blood routine, liver and kidney function tests, blood lipids and blood sugar, etc.)
   Tumor-related examinations: breast and regional lymph nodes (ultrasound, mammography), distant metastasis sites (chest CT scan, abdominal ultrasound, neck and supraclavicular ultrasound, etc.) and serum tumor markers
   Special examinations: gynecological examinationa, bone density testb, heart examinationc, bone scand, thyroid functione, adrenal functione, PET-CT, etc.
Follow-up of psychosocial status I A
   Psychosocial status assessment
    Insomnia, anxiety, and depression symptoms (20)f
    Psychosocial needs (21-23)g
   Recommended treatment
    Medicationh and/or psychotherapy (20)i
    Psychosocial support (24): family support, reproductive support, psychoeducational support, social support, etc.
Treatment-related complications and management principles I A
   Surgery-related complications (25): wound complications, postoperative functional complications, etc.
   Radiation therapy-related complications (26): skin injury, brachial plexus injury, lung injury, heart injury, rib fracture, etc.
   Chemotherapy/targeted therapy-related complications (27): myelosuppression, gastrointestinal reactions, cardiotoxicity, allergic reactions, peripheral nerve damage, etc.
   Immunotherapy-related complications (28,29): skin toxicity, gastrointestinal reactions, endocrine toxicity (hypothyroidism, hypophysitis), immune-related pneumonia, immune-related hepatitis, etc.
   Endocrine therapy-related complications (27): osteoporosis, perimenopausal symptoms, etc.
   Treatment principles (30): prevention first, dynamic monitoring, risk stratification, hierarchical intervention, and whole-process management
Information collection and database establishment for single disease data (31,32) II A
   Information collection: see Appendix 1
   Information storage: clinicians need to upload all the collected information to the database and compile it into a follow-up manual for patients
   Information tracking and updating: clinicians should track patient follow-up status and continuously update patient follow-up information

a, gynecological examination should be performed every 6 months for patients taking SERMs with intact uterus or ovaries. b, it is recommended to review bone mineral density every 1–2 years for premenopausal patients receiving ovarian castration/ovarian function inhibitors and postmenopausal patients receiving aromatase inhibitors. For those with high-risk factors such as a history of fractures or those aged >65 years, bone density monitoring is recommended every 6–12 months. c, patients receiving targeted (anti-HER2 therapy, ribociclib)/chemical (anthracycline)/checkpoint inhibitor therapy are recommended to undergo cardiac examinations every 3 months. d, patients with high-risk factors (>4 lymph node metastases), who represent a higher-risk category even among non-metastatic breast cancer patients, are recommended to undergo annual bone scans. Patients experiencing symptoms suggestive of bone metastasis, such as bone pain, pathological fractures, and hypercalcemia, should undergo a bone scan immediately. e, patients receiving immunomodulatory point inhibitors should receive thyroid function, adrenal function and urine routine examination during treatment. f, assessment scales for insomnia, anxiety and depression are recommended: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Hamilton Anxiety Scale, etc. g, psychosocial needs assessment scales were recommended: patient-reported outcomes, Supportive Care Needs Survey-Short Form 34, Social Difficulties Inventory 21, etc. h, sedative and hypnotic drugs, anti-anxiety and depression drugs. i, cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness intervention therapy, interpersonal psychotherapy, etc. CT, computed tomography; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; PET-CT, positron emission tomography/computed tomography; SERM, selective estrogen receptor modulator.

Discussion

Prognosis refers to the prediction of the future course and clinical outcomes of a disease, integrating consideration of its natural history, the patient’s clinicopathological features, response to treatment, and individual biological characteristics. Follow-up constitutes a structured process in which patients proactively return to the hospital or healthcare providers maintain contact using discharge information, aiming to monitor disease control and physical status, while guiding patients in timely reevaluations, medication adherence, rehabilitation training, and reintegration into social life (33,34). Accurate prognosis assessment paired with systematic follow-up offers a scientific foundation for clinicians to formulate individualized treatment strategies and follow-up plans, as well as facilitate communication with patients regarding disease outcomes, ultimately contributing to improving quality of life and higher cure rates.

The main aims of postoperative follow-up for patients with early-stage breast cancer include: monitoring and managing surgical and adjuvant therapy-related complications; screening for tumor recurrence, metastasis, and second primary tumors; providing psychosocial support; and collecting data to build a single-disease database. Expert consensus stresses the importance of clearly evaluating and documenting factors that affect the prognosis of patients with early-stage breast cancer. These factors were categorized according to the patient’s general condition, tumor-related characteristics, and treatment modalities (Table 3). Breast cancer patients exhibit distinct clinicopathological features, treatment approaches, and prognostic outcomes across different age groups. Compared with older patients, younger individuals tend to present with more aggressive tumor biology and a poorer prognosis (1,35). Approximately 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases are hereditary in nature (2). Although the patient’s general condition, such as menstrual, marital and childbearing history, is important for developing individualized treatment plans and assessing risk, these factors primarily serve to refine and modify the prognosis established by key tumor characteristics, including stage and histopathology. Key established susceptibility genes linked to breast cancer risk include BRCA1/2, TP53, PALB2, NF1, and PTEN, among others (36). Germline BRCA1/2 mutations are associated with poorer overall survival in patients with breast cancer (37). Ovarian function assessment plays a critical role in guiding the selection and scheduling of adjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy. In addition, underlying conditions such as diabetes, hyperlipidemia (38,39), mental health disorders (40), and elevated body mass index (BMI) (41) are associated with poorer prognosis in breast cancer patients and closely linked to long-term survival and mortality outcomes. Experts recommend that tumor burden be evaluated in accordance with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual (8th Edition) (5). Pathological assessment should be conducted according to the 5th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of breast tumors (42). The Miller-Payne (MP) grading system and residual tumor burden (RCB) grading system are recommended for pathological evaluation after neoadjuvant therapy (9,10). Experts advise thoroughly documenting patient responses to neoadjuvant therapy and using this information to guide individualized adjuvant treatment planning. Following the publication of trials such as OlympiA and PATTERN (43,44), PARP inhibitors and platinum-based drugs are increasingly utilized in adjuvant treatment of early-stage breast cancer patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations. Patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations face a significantly higher risk of contralateral breast cancer (13), and prophylactic contralateral mastectomy has been shown to effectively reduce this risk (45). Experts recommend documenting germline BRCA1/2 mutation status as a critical prognostic factor in managing patients with early-stage breast cancer. Furthermore, accumulating evidence suggests that PIK3CA mutations are associated with poorer prognosis in patients with early-stage breast cancer, making assessment of PIK3CA gene status clinically significant for prognostic stratification and individualized treatment planning (46,47). Multigene testing, including the 21-gene recurrence score (Oncotype DX) and the 70-gene signature (MammaPrint), plays a critical role in prognosis assessment (14,15). Experts recommend recording these results as reference indicators in prognostic systems. Experts emphasize that surgical techniques and postoperative complications are critical in prognostic assessment. In particular, achieving a negative surgical margin (R0) is essential for favorable outcomes, regardless of the specific surgical approach employed (16). Furthermore, surgery-related complications—such as impaired wound healing, seroma, infection, chronic pain, upper limb dysfunction, and lymphedema—can delay the initiation of adjuvant therapy, reduce treatment adherence and efficacy, and negatively impact quality of life, thereby indirectly influencing survival outcomes (25). Therefore, a comprehensive prognostic evaluation should include detailed documentation of the surgical procedure, margin status, intraoperative lymph node assessment, and the occurrence and management of any postoperative complications. This information should be integrated into the patient’s individualized follow-up and survivorship care plan. Experts also recommend incorporating adjuvant therapy data into predictive models and follow-up systems to improve prognostic accuracy.

Establishing a scientific and standardized follow-up system is essential for improving long-term survival in patients with early-stage breast cancer (Table 4). Experts recommend determining follow-up intervals and frequency according to recurrence and metastasis risk stratification and prognostic assessment. In addition to routine examinations, such as medical history, physical examination, laboratory tests, ultrasound and mammography, additional appropriate examinations and evaluations are recommended for patients with abnormal findings, those receiving specific therapies, or with distinct clinical manifestations. Greater attention should be given to the psychological well-being of patients. It is recommended to conduct regular assessments of patients’ psychological status and social needs, along with timely interventions to support their psychosocial rehabilitation (Table 4). Treatment-related complications refer to adverse events from breast cancer therapies, while preexisting patient comorbidities are collectively termed concomitant diseases of breast cancer (CDBC) (48-50). CDBC impairs patients’ quality of life, reduces treatment adherence and may lead to therapy interruption or disease recurrence. Clinicians should not only develop adjuvant treatment plan, but also ensure effective CDBC management by assigning responsibilities to specific locations and personnel through multi-channel integration strategies, including the hierarchical medical system, general practice, and community healthcare facilities (30,51). In clinical practice, particular attention should be paid to patients based on their medication history, and clinicians are advised to routinely recommend appropriate auxiliary examinations to facilitate early diagnosis and timely intervention, reducing the risk of severe adverse events. Breast cancer follow-up management should be standardized, with a dedicated follow-up team established, and a single-disease multidisciplinary chronic disease management model effectively implemented. Furthermore, the establishment of a structured and standardized single-disease database for breast cancer is a critical metric for evaluating diagnostic and treatment center capabilities and constitutes essential infrastructure for advancing scientific research and improving healthcare quality. Single-disease treatment management and control is a medical quality management method that establishes quality control indicators and evaluation systems for the entire diagnostic and therapeutic process of a specific disease, serving as a unit to standardize clinical practices and improve the quality and safety of healthcare delivery (31). Since 2009, China has implemented quality control and management for single-disease programs, now aligned with international standards. In 2020, the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China issued a series of regulations pertaining to the quality management of single-disease programs. In May 2025, the National Health Commission commended the “China Breast Cancer Single-Disease Diagnosis and Treatment Capacity Improvement Project” led by Academician Song Erwei. The project involved 34 participating hospitals across 15 provinces and over 60,000 clinical cases, establishing a six-dimensional data evaluation system and a standardized dataset for breast cancer clinical research (31,52). Based on the aforementioned information, experts reached a consensus that clinicians should establish hospital-specific quality management indicators for individual diseases in accordance with the National Health Commission’s guidelines on single-disease management, with detailed data elements in Appendix 1. Follow-up specialists were trained to utilize information systems to collect, analyze, and report quality monitoring data related to individual diseases, while designated quality assurance personnel were assigned responsibility for data reporting and coordination of related procedural tasks (53). For database maintenance, tracking, and updating, advanced practices include the establishment of a comprehensive patient management protocol throughout the care continuum. Designated physicians at collaborating hospitals are responsible for patient follow-up and periodic evaluations. Modern digital health tools, such as mobile applications and smart wearable devices (e.g., smartwatches), are utilized to enable intelligent matching between patients, healthcare providers, and required interventions. A dedicated fast-track pathway is available for recurrence or metastasis cases, and predictive risk models are developed through artificial intelligence-driven data analysis, supporting intelligent, multidimensional patient management (54). Experts recommended that diagnosis and treatment centers establish a dedicated follow-up team to systematically monitor and update data in real time using a standardized, unified data model. Furthermore, experts emphasized the seamless integration of the breast cancer clinical database with the scientific research big data platform, along with access controls and data anonymization protocols to ensure robust data security (32,55). Prognosis assessment and follow-up management are as critical as diagnosis and treatment in early breast cancer patients, playing a pivotal role in determining long-term survival outcomes. Prognostic evaluation and systematic follow-up are essential to comprehensive care, requiring multidisciplinary collaboration. Experts expect that this guideline will serve as a valuable reference and oversight tool for clinicians managing early breast cancer, and call for ongoing refinement of clinical practices through sustained collaborative efforts among healthcare professionals nationwide.

Conclusions

The prognostic evaluation and systematic follow-up of early-stage breast cancer represent integral components of clinical management, complementing diagnosis and treatment in their importance for long-term patient outcomes. This guideline consolidates current evidence and expert consensus to provide a structured framework for Chinese practice. Its effective adoption relies on coordinated multidisciplinary collaboration and a sustained commitment to individualized, patient-centered care. We anticipate these recommendations will serve as a practical reference for clinicians and contribute to standardized, high-quality management nationwide. Continuous refinement through real-world experience and emerging evidence will further strengthen this evolving field.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all the compiling committee members and other experts who offered help to these guidelines. The list of Compiling Committee Members (in alphabetical order by surname) is as follows: Zhongwei Cao, Dedian Chen, Yuanjia Cheng, Xuening Duan, Zhimin Fan, Peifen Fu, Jian Huang, Hongchuan Jiang, Feng Jin, Hua Kang, Rui Ling, Jinping Liu, Ke Liu, Yinhua Liu, Yunjiang Liu, Zhenzhen Liu, Xiang Qu, Ailin Song, Xingsong Tian, Chuan Wang, Jiandong Wang, Shu Wang, Kejin Wu, Wu Wei, Zhigang Yu, Jianguo Zhang, Jin Zhang, Jinghua Zhang, Yi Zhao, Zuowei Zhao, Wei Zhu, Qiang Zou. We would like also to express our sincerest gratitude to Dr. Yinhua Liu for his valuable time and effort in this research process, as well as his selfless assistance and valuable suggestions during the experimental design and paper revision process. This guideline is intended for use by Chinese clinicians specializing in breast diseases and is not designed to serve as a reference for patients or healthcare professionals outside the field of breast medicine. It evaluates the quality of relevant clinical evidence according to the GRADE framework and formulates recommendations of varying strength based on both the quality of evidence and the practical accessibility of surgical interventions within the Chinese clinical context. The primary objective of this guideline is to support clinical decision-making among breast disease specialists. It is not intended to serve as a basis for medical evaluations, nor does it have any adjudicative function in medical disputes.

Footnote

Reporting Checklist: The authors have completed the RIGHT reporting checklist. Available at https://tbcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tbcr-2025-1-64/rc

Peer Review File: Available at https://tbcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tbcr-2025-1-64/prf

Funding: None.

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tbcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tbcr-2025-1-64/coif). Y.L., Z.F., and F.J. serve as unpaid editorial board members of Translational Breast Cancer Research from March 2026 to February 2028. The Expert Committee responsible for the development of this guideline declares no conflicts of interest. The Chinese Society of Breast Surgery, Chinese Society of Surgery, and Chinese Medical Association assume no liability for results involving in the inappropriate application of this guideline and reserves the right to interpret and revise the guideline. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

References

  1. B Jackson E. Does age affect outcome with breast cancer? Breast 2023;70:25-31. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  2. Sun J, Meng H, Yao L, et al. Germline Mutations in Cancer Susceptibility Genes in a Large Series of Unselected Breast Cancer Patients. Clin Cancer Res 2017;23:6113-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  3. Hinyard L, Wirth LS, Clancy JM, et al. The effect of marital status on breast cancer-related outcomes in women under 65: A SEER database analysis. Breast 2017;32:13-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  4. Bornes L, van Winden LJ, Geurts VCM, et al. The oestrous cycle stage affects mammary tumour sensitivity to chemotherapy. Nature 2025;637:195-204. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  5. Giuliano AE, Edge SB, Hortobagyi GN. Eighth Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Breast Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2018;25:1783-5.
  6. Li CI, Uribe DJ, Daling JR. Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2005;93:1046-52. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  7. Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Baehner F, et al. Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res 2010;12:207. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  8. Houvenaeghel G, Cohen M, Classe JM, et al. Lymphovascular invasion has a significant prognostic impact in patients with early breast cancer, results from a large, national, multicenter, retrospective cohort study. ESMO Open 2021;6:100316. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  9. Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:4414-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  10. Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast 2003;12:320-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  11. Denkert C, von Minckwitz G, Darb-Esfahani S, et al. Tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and prognosis in different subtypes of breast cancer: a pooled analysis of 3771 patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy. Lancet Oncol 2018;19:40-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  12. Yerushalmi R, Woods R, Ravdin PM, et al. Ki67 in breast cancer: prognostic and predictive potential. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:174-83. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  13. Su L, Xu Y, Ouyang T, et al. Contralateral breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers in a large cohort of unselected Chinese breast cancer patients. Int J Cancer 2020;146:3335-42. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  14. Andre F, Ismaila N, Henry NL, et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline update—integration of results from TAILORx. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:1956-64. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  15. Piccart M, van 't Veer LJ, Poncet C, et al. 70-gene signature as an aid for treatment decisions in early breast cancer: updated results of the phase 3 randomised MINDACT trial with an exploratory analysis by age. Lancet Oncol 2021;22:476-88. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  16. Bundred JR, Michael S, Stuart B, et al. Margin status and survival outcomes after breast cancer conservation surgery: prospectively registered systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2022;378:e070346. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  17. Chinese Society of Breast Surgery, Chinese Society of Surgery, Chinese Medical Association. Clinical practice China guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of patients with invasive breast cancer (2022 edition). Chin J Pract Surg 2022;42:121-7.
  18. Gradishar WJ, Moran MS, Abraham J, et al. Breast cancer, version 4.2025. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. 2025.
  19. Khatcheressian JL, Wolff AC, Smith TJ, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2006 update of the breast cancer follow-up and management guidelines in the adjuvant setting. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:5091-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  20. Chinese Society of Neurology, Chinese Society of Sleep Disorders, Chinese Society of Neuropsychology and Behavioral Neurology. Expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of insomnia with depression and anxiety in Chinese adults. Chin J Neurol 2020;53:564-74.
  21. Gotay CC, Kawamoto CT, Bottomley A, et al. The prognostic significance of patient-reported outcomes in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1355-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  22. Ashley L, Keding A, Brown J, et al. Score equivalence of electronic and paper versions of the Social Difficulties Inventory (SDI-21): a randomised crossover trial in cancer patients. Qual Life Res 2013;22:1435-40. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  23. Au A, Lam WW, Kwong A, et al. Validation of the Chinese version of the short-form Supportive Care Needs Survey Questionnaire (SCNS-SF34-C). Psychooncology 2011;20:1292-300. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  24. Tucker-Seeley R, Abu-Khalaf M, Bona K, et al. Social Determinants of Health and Cancer Care: An ASCO Policy Statement. JCO Oncol Pract 2024;20:621-30. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  25. Al-Hilli Z, Wilkerson A. Breast Surgery: Management of Postoperative Complications Following Operations for Breast Cancer. Surg Clin North Am 2021;101:845-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  26. Radiation Oncology Physicians Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association. Guidelines for radiotherapy of breast cancer (Chinese Medical Doctor Association 2020 edition). Chin J Radiat Oncol 2021;30:221-8.
  27. Cathcart-Rake EJ, Tevaarwerk AJ, Haddad TC, et al. Advances in the care of breast cancer survivors. BMJ 2023;382:e071565. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  28. Schneider BJ. Management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2022;40:315-6.
  29. Wang K, Yang J, Wang B, et al. Expert consensus on the clinical application of immunotherapy in breast cancer: 2024. Transl Breast Cancer Res 2024;5:9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  30. Xu B, Ma F. Comprehensive management guideline for breast cancer follow-up and healthcare (2022 edition). Chin J Oncol 2022;44:245-52.
  31. National Health Commission. Circular of the General Office of the National Health Commission on further strengthening the quality management and control of single disease. 2020.
  32. Brembilla A, Martin B, Parmentier AL, et al. How to set up a database?-a five-step process. J Thorac Dis 2018;10:S3533-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  33. De Rose F, Meduri B, De Santis MC, et al. Rethinking breast cancer follow-up based on individual risk and recurrence management. Cancer Treat Rev 2022;109:102434. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  34. Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, et al. Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? BMJ 2009;338:b375. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  35. Anderson WF, Pfeiffer RM, Dores GM, et al. Comparison of age distribution patterns for different histopathologic types of breast carcinoma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:1899-905. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  36. Lynch HT, Snyder CL, Lynch JF, et al. Hereditary breast-ovarian cancer at the bedside: role of the medical oncologist. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:740-53. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  37. Baretta Z, Mocellin S, Goldin E, et al. Effect of BRCA germline mutations on breast cancer prognosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e4975. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  38. Laurberg T, Witte DR, Gudbjörnsdottir S, et al. Diabetes-related risk factors and survival among individuals with type 2 diabetes and breast, lung, colorectal, or prostate cancer. Sci Rep 2024;14:10956. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  39. Ghahremanfard F, Mirmohammadkhani M, Shahnazari B, et al. The Valuable Role of Measuring Serum Lipid Profile in Cancer Progression. Oman Med J 2015;30:353-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  40. Giese-Davis J, Collie K, Rancourt KM, et al. Decrease in depression symptoms is associated with longer survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a secondary analysis. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:413-20. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  41. Chan DSM, Vieira AR, Aune D, et al. Body mass index and survival in women with breast cancer-systematic literature review and meta-analysis of 82 follow-up studies. Ann Oncol 2014;25:1901-14. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  42. Tan PH, Ellis I, Allison K, et al. The 2019 World Health Organization classification of tumours of the breast. Histopathology 2020;77:181-5. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  43. Ganz PA, Bandos H, Španić T, et al. Patient-Reported Outcomes in OlympiA: A Phase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Adjuvant Olaparib in gBRCA1/2 Mutations and High-Risk Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Early Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2024;42:1288-300. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  44. Yu KD, Ye FG, He M, et al. Effect of Adjuvant Paclitaxel and Carboplatin on Survival in Women With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2020;6:1390-6. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  45. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Lynch HT, et al. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1055-62. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  46. Hassan F, Wang JH, O'Leary DP, et al. Association of preoperative and postoperative circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) with PIK3CA gene mutation with risk of recurrence in patients with non-metastatic breast cancer. Surg Oncol 2024;54:102060. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  47. Chinese Society of Pathology, Pathology Expert Committee of Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology, Pathology Quality Control Center. Guidelines on tests of PIK3CA mutation in breast cancer in China (2025 version). Chin J Pathol 2025;54:120-5.
  48. Dumas E, Grandal Rejo B, Gougis P, et al. Concomitant medication, comorbidity and survival in patients with breast cancer. Nat Commun 2024;15:2966. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  49. Vrinzen CEJ, Delfgou L, Stadhouders N, et al. A Systematic Review and Multilevel Regression Analysis Reveals the Comorbidity Prevalence in Cancer. Cancer Res 2023;83:1147-57. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  50. Stabellini N, Cullen J, Cao L, et al. Racial disparities in breast cancer treatment patterns and treatment related adverse events. Sci Rep 2023;13:1233. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  51. Prevention and Treatment Committee of Healthy China Research Center, Breast Cancer Rehabilitation Committee of China Anti-Cancer Association, Chinese Society of Breast Surgery of Surgical Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association, et al. Chinese expert consensus on comprehensive management of concomitant disease of breast cancer through combining general practitioners and tumor specialist (2025 Edition). Chin J Endocr Surg 2025;19:145-52.
  52. National Health Commission. Notice from the General Office of the National Health Commission on Commending Typical Cases of Digital Health (Second Batch). 2022. (2022-05-31)[2025-10-20].
  53. Yin C, Wang JW, Zhang LC, et al. Discussion on working ideas for medical institutions in implementing single disease quality management. Chin Health Qual Manag 2022;29:29-32.
  54. Chen K, Li H, Pan Z, et al. Insights into artificial intelligence in clinical oncology: opportunities and challenges. Sci China Life Sci 2022;65:643-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  55. Peng M, Chen QR, Chen K. Conceptual framework of a next-generation general-purpose clinical scientific disease database. Cancer Res Prev Treat 2024;51:321-7.
doi: 10.21037/tbcr-2025-1-64
Cite this article as: Wang J, Zhang D, Zhang Y, Wu N, Yu H, Guan Y, Fan Z, Liu Y, Jin F. Clinical practice guidelines for prognosis and follow-up of early-stage breast cancer patients: Chinese Society of Breast Surgery (CSBrS) practice guidelines (2026 edition) Chinese Society of Breast Surgery, Chinese Society of Surgery, Chinese Medical Association. Transl Breast Cancer Res 2026;7:19.

Article Options

Download Citation

Share