Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20714815›Full record

ReviewWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2010

[Hormonal contraception and breast cancer risk].

Vesna Bjelic-Radisic, Edgar Petru

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vesna Bjelic-RadisicKlinische Abteilung für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Medizinische Universität Graz, Österreich. vesna.bjelic-radisic@medunigraz.at
Edgar Petru
Medical University of Graz · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The largest meta-analysis comprised a total of 54 epidemiologic studies (Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer) and included 53,297 women with breast cancer and 100,239 controls. Women currently using hormonal contraceptives had a modestly elevated risk for breast cancer (RR 1.24). This risk continuously decreased over years and did not exist after discontinuation of the drugs after ten years. Women who had started on contraceptives before the age of 20, had an elevated risk for breast cancer over the subsequent years (relative risk = RR 1.95 until the 30th year of age, RR 1.54 between 30 and 34 years, and RR 1.27 between the age of 35 and 40 years, respectively) compared to those who started to use contraceptives after 20 years of age. There was no difference in the risk between the different dosages, combined or gestagen-based contraceptives. However, the proportion of women using gestagens only was small. Study data on the effect of oral contraceptives in women with BRCA1/2 mutation or women with a positive familial history are controversial. A recently published systematic overview of 10 studies including a pooled analysis of 54 studies did not reveal an elevated breast cancer risk for women carrying an elevated breast cancer risk taking contraceptives.

Indexed as

AdultAge FactorsBRCA1 ProteinBRCA2 ProteinBreast NeoplasmsContraceptives, Oral, HormonalDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansRiskYoung AdultBRCA1 ProteinBRCA1 protein, humanBRCA2 ProteinBRCA2 protein, humanContraceptives, Oral, Hormonal

Identifiers

PMID20714815
OpenAlexW1508968725

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.