Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30174762›Full record

ReviewThe EPMA journal2018

Current approaches in the clinical management of pregnancy-associated breast cancer-pros and cons.

Pavol Zubor, Peter Kubatka, Ivana Kapustova, Lence Miloseva, Zuzana Dankova, Alexandra Gondova, Tibor Bielik, Stefan Krivus, Jan Bujnak, Zuzana Laucekova and 3 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The EPMA journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.1field-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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Cancer in pregnancy: breast cancer.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Pavol Zubor1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Peter Kubatka2Division of Oncology, Biomedical Center Martin, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Ivana Kapustova1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Lence Miloseva4Department of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology, Faculty of Medical Science, Goce Delcev University, Stip, Macedonia.
Zuzana Dankova2Division of Oncology, Biomedical Center Martin, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Alexandra Gondova1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Tibor Bielik1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Stefan Krivus1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Jan BujnakDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kukuras Michalovce Hospital, Michalovce, Slovakia.
Zuzana Laucekova1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Christina Kehrer7Centre for Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Erik Kudela1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Jan Danko1Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine, Comenius University in Bratislava, Martin University Hospital, Martin, Slovak Republic.
Comenius University Bratislava · SKMartin University Hospital · SKGoce Delcev University · MKŠtefan Kukura Hospital in Michalovce · SKUniversity of Bonn · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malignancies are one of the leading causes of mortality in women during their reproductive life. Treatment of gynecological malignant tumors during pregnancy is possible but not simple, since it creates a conflict between care of the mother and the fetus. BC is the most prevalent malignancy diagnosed in pregnancy, ranking up to 21% of all pregnancy-related malignancies. Due to its stets increasing prevalence, aggressive cancer subtype, and severe ethical and psychological aspects linked to the disease, experts raise an alarm for an acute necessity to improve the overall management of the PABC-the issue which has strongly motivated our current paper. Comprehensive research data and clinical experience accumulated in recent years have advanced our understanding of the disease complexity. PABC treatment must be individualized with an emphasis on optimal care of the mother, while observing standard treatment protocols with regard to safety of the fetus. Treatment protocols should be elaborated based on the individualized patient profile, bearing in mind the acute danger to the mother, maximizing the therapy efficacy and minimizing harmful effects to the fetus. Complex consulting on treatment options, their impacts on pregnancy and potential teratogenic effects requires tight "doctor-patient" collaboration. Complications that may arise due to the treatment of breast cancer in pregnancy require a multiprofessional expertise including oncologists, neonatologists, perinatologists, obstetricians, teratologists, and toxicologists, and an extensive psychological support throughout the pregnancy and after giving birth. Thereby, specifically psychological aspects of PABC diagnosis and follow-up are frequently neglected, being not yet adequately explored in the entire disease management approach. Herewith, we update the status quo regarding the currently available diagnostic modalities, complex treatment algorithms, and novel clinical approaches which altogether argue for an urgent necessity of a paradigm shift moving away from reactive to predictive, preventive, and personalized medical approach in the overall management of PABC meeting the needs of young populations, persons at high risk, affected patients, and families as the society at large.

Indexed as

Breast cancerChemotherapyDiagnosticsPregnancyPreventive predictive personalized medicinePsychological aspectsRadiotherapyTreatment

Identifiers

PMID30174762
PMCPMC6107452
OpenAlexW2810149096

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.