A Scoping Review of Precision Medicine in Breast Reconstruction (2011-2025)
Aryanpour Z., McCranie AS., Yu JW., Winocour J., Egan KG., Mathes D.
Narrative Review, published in J Pers Med (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- J Pers Med (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 40423050
- PMCID
- PMC12113009
- DOI
- 10.3390/jpm15050178
Abstract (original English)
Background: Personalization of medical care is a significant topic of interest. Precision medicine denotes customized medical treatments based on individual genetic, molecular, and/or biomarker data. We conducted a scoping review to identify studies exploring precision medicine in breast reconstruction. Objectives: (1) To map the existing literature, (2) to identify key concepts, and (3) to discuss current and future clinical implications of precision medicine in breast reconstruction. Eligibility criteria: Indexed journal articles (primary research studies) relating to precision medicine in breast reconstruction written in the English language. Sources of evidence: Medline (via Pubmed), Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Charting methods: Data charting of selected studies was performed independently by two reviewers using Microsoft Excel. Any discrepancies in data charting were addressed through inter-reviewer discussion and/or expert review. Results: Of 321 initial records, 9 studies that were published between 2011 and 2025 were included in the final review. Eight studies focused predominantly on genomics, and one study focused predominantly on targeted therapies. Genomic-based studies were frequently implemented to evaluate patient risk and inform clinical decision-making, while targeted therapies were used to optimize reconstructive outcomes through cell-based thera
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.