Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22733233›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2012

Breast cancer in young women.

Steven A Narod

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
96citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

96 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Steven A NarodWomens College Research Institute, 790 Bay Street, Toronto, ON M5G 1N8, Canada. steven.narod@wchospital.ca

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

About one in 300 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer before the age of 40. Advances in screening have not had an impact on mortality in women who are too young to be candidates for screening. Risk factors for early breast cancer include a lean body habitus and recent use of an oral contraceptive. Breast cancers in very young women are typically aggressive, in part owing to the over-representation of high-grade, triple-negative tumours, but young age is an independent negative predictor of cancer-specific survival. Very early age-of-onset also correlates strongly with the risk of local recurrence and with the odds of contralateral breast cancer. Given the high risks of local and distant recurrence in young women with invasive breast cancer, most (if not all) young patients are candidates for chemotherapy. It is hoped that by increasing breast cancer awareness, the proportion of invasive breast cancers that are diagnosed at 2.0 cm or smaller will increase and that this will lead to a reduction in mortality.

Indexed as

Age FactorsBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRisk Factors

Identifiers

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.