Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25663687›Full record

ArticleJournal of the National Cancer Institute2015

Prognostic significance of mammographic density change after initiation of tamoxifen for ER-positive breast cancer.

Sarah J Nyante, Mark E Sherman, Ruth M Pfeiffer, Amy Berrington de Gonzalez, Louise A Brinton, Erin J Aiello Bowles, Robert N Hoover, Andrew Glass, Gretchen L Gierach

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Low-Dose Tamoxifen for Mammographic Density Reduction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  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. Article
  20. Review
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah J NyanteDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Mark E ShermanDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Ruth M PfeifferDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Amy Berrington de GonzalezDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Louise A BrintonDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Erin J Aiello BowlesDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Robert N HooverDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Andrew GlassDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Gretchen L GierachDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics (SJN, MES, RMP, ABdG, LAB, RNH, GLG) and Division of Cancer Prevention (MES), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (EJAB); Kaiser Permanente Northwest Center for Health Research, Portland, OR (AG).Current affiliation: SJN is currently affiliated with the Radiology Department, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. gierachg@mail.nih.gov.
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Hormone-Related CancersZIACP010126 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI GIERACH, GRETCHEN · 2009 to 2025
$103.5M
Intramural NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA prior analysis of postmenopausal breast cancer patients linked a decline in mammographic density (MD) following the initiation of tamoxifen treatment with improved survival, but excluded premenopausal women, for whom tamoxifen is the primary anti-endocrine therapy. Therefore, we evaluated change in MD after tamoxifen and breast cancer death among patients age 32 to 87 years.

methodsThis case-control study included 349 estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer patients who were treated with tamoxifen at Kaiser Permanente Northwest (1990-2008): 97 who died from breast cancer (case patients) and 252 who did not (control patients), matched on age and year at diagnosis and disease stage. Percent MD in the unaffected breast was measured at baseline (mean six months before tamoxifen initiation) and follow-up (mean 12 months after initiation). Associations between change in MD and breast cancer death were estimated using conditional logistic regression.

resultsPatients in the highest tertile of MD decline had a lower risk of breast cancer death when compared with women in the lowest tertile (odds ratio [OR] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.22 to 0.88); results were similar after adjustment for baseline MD (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.23 to 1.02). Reductions in death were observed only among patients in the middle and upper tertiles of baseline MD. Associations did not differ by age, tamoxifen use duration, estrogen and/or progestin use, body mass index, or receipt of chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

conclusionThese data suggest that younger and older ER-positive breast cancer patients who experience large reductions in MD following tamoxifen initiation have an improved prognosis.

Indexed as

MammographyAdultAgedAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalBreast NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNorthwestern United StatesPremenopausePrognosisReceptors, EstrogenSelective Estrogen Receptor ModulatorsTamoxifenAntineoplastic Agents, HormonalReceptors, EstrogenSelective Estrogen Receptor ModulatorsTamoxifen

Identifiers

PMID25663687
PMCPMC4334825
OpenAlexW2123419082

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.