Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21494667›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2011

Antidepressants and breast and ovarian cancer risk: a review of the literature and researchers' financial associations with industry.

Lisa Cosgrove, Ling Shi, David E Creasey, Maria Anaya-McKivergan, Jessica A Myers, Krista F Huybrechts

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Industry sponsorship and research outcome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lisa CosgroveThe Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America. lcosgrove@ethics.harvard.edu
Ling Shi
David E Creasey
Maria Anaya-McKivergan
Jessica A Myers
Krista F Huybrechts
Harvard University · USUniversity of Massachusetts Boston · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USUniversity of Phoenix · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntidepressant (AD) use has been purported to increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, although both epidemiological and pre-clinical studies have reported mixed results. Previous studies in a variety of biomedical fields have found that financial ties to drug companies are associated with favorable study conclusions. METHODS AND

findingsWe searched English-language articles in MEDLINE, PsychINFO, the Science Citations Index and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (through November 2010). A total of 61 articles that assessed the relationship between breast and ovarian cancer and AD use and articles that examined the effect of ADs on cell growth were included. Multi-modal screening techniques were used to investigate researchers' financial ties with industry. A random effects meta-analysis was used to pool the findings from the epidemiological literature. Thirty-three percent (20/61) of the studies reported a positive association between ADs and cancer. Sixty-seven percent (41/61) of the studies reported no association or antiproliferative effect. The pooled odds ratio for the association between AD use and breast/ovarian cancer in the epidemiologic studies was 1.11 (95% CI, 1.03-1.20). Researchers with industry affiliations were significantly less likely than researchers without those ties to conclude that ADs increase the risk of breast or ovarian cancer. (0/15 [0%] vs 20/46 [43.5%] (Fisher's Exact test P = 0.0012).

conclusionsBoth the pre-clinical and clinical data are mixed in terms of showing an association between AD use and breast and ovarian cancer. The possibility that ADs may exhibit a bi-phasic effect, whereby short-term use and/or low dose antidepressants may increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer, warrants further investigation. Industry affiliations were significantly associated with negative conclusions regarding cancer risk. The findings have implications in light of the 2009 USPSTF guidelines for breast cancer screening and for the informed consent process.

Indexed as

Antidepressive AgentsBayes TheoremBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIndustryOvarian NeoplasmsPublication BiasResearch PersonnelRisk FactorsAntidepressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID21494667
PMCPMC3071810
OpenAlexW2168170734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.