ArticlePloS one2015
Vitamin D intake, month the mammogram was taken and mammographic density in Norwegian women aged 50-69.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation on Risk of Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in nutrition · 2021Pooled it
- Role of micronutrients, phytochemicals, and lipid metabolism in mammary gland development, lactation efficiency, and breast cancer risk.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Correlation of mammographic density and serum calcium levels in patients with primary breast cancer.Cancer medicine · 2017Observational
- Vitamin D and Mammographic Findings.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2016Article
- Increased vitamin D and calcium intake associated with reduced mammographic breast density among premenopausal women.Nutrition research (New York, N.Y.) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe role of vitamin D in breast cancer etiology is unclear. There is some, but inconsistent, evidence that vitamin D is associated with both breast cancer risk and mammographic density (MD). We evaluated the associations of MD with month the mammogram was taken, and with vitamin D intake, in a population of women from Norway--a country with limited sunlight exposure for a large part of the year.
methods3114 women aged 50-69, who participated in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program (NBCSP) in 2004 or 2006/07, completed risk factor and food frequency (FFQ) questionnaires. Dietary and total (dietary plus supplements) vitamin D, calcium and energy intakes were estimated by the FFQ. Month when the mammogram was taken was recorded on the mammogram. Percent MD was assessed using a computer assisted method (Madena, University of Southern California) after digitization of the films. Linear regression models were used to investigate percent MD associations with month the mammogram was taken, and vitamin D and calcium intakes, adjusting for age, body mass index (BMI), study year, estrogen and progestin therapy (EPT), education, parity, calcium intakes and energy intakes.
resultsThere was no statistical significant association between the month the mammogram was taken and percent MD. Overall, there was no association between percent MD and quartiles of total or dietary vitamin D intakes, or of calcium intake. However, analysis restricted to women aged <55 years revealed a suggestive inverse association between total vitamin D intake and percent MD (p for trend = 0.03).
conclusionOverall, we found no strong evidence that month the mammogram was taken was associated with percent MD. We found no inverse association between vitamin D intake and percent MD overall, but observed a suggestive inverse association between dietary vitamin D and MD for women less than 55 years old.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.