Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31267686›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2019

Effects of marital status on breast cancer survival by age, race, and hormone receptor status: A population-based Study.

Zhen Zhai, Fang Zhang, Yi Zheng, Linghui Zhou, Tian Tian, Shuai Lin, Yujiao Deng, Peng Xu, Qian Hao, Na Li and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  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. Article
  20. Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Zhen ZhaiDepartment of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Fang ZhangThe Second Department of Oncology, The Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefacture, Enshi, China.
Yi ZhengDepartment of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Linghui ZhouDepartment of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Tian TianDepartment of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Shuai LinDepartment of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Yujiao DengDepartment of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Peng XuDepartment of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Qian HaoDepartment of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Na LiDepartment of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Pengtao YangDepartment of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Hongtao LiDepartment of Breast Head and Neck surgery, The 3rd Affiliated Teaching Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University (Affiliated Tumor Hospital), Urumqi, China.
Zhijun DaiDepartment of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5209-8626
Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University · CNThe Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture · CNXinjiang Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIt remains unclear whether marital status could affect the breast cancer-caused special survival (BCSS) of patients with breast cancer. Therefore, we sought to explore the influence of demographic and pathological factors on prognosis of patients with breast cancer. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe selected patients meeting the eligibility criteria from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry program. We assessed the effect of marital status on overall survival (OS) and BCSS using Kaplan-Meier curve and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression.

resultsCompared with divorced/separated/widowed (DSW) patients, the married (AHR 0.7483, 95% CI: 0.729-0.7682, P < 0.001) and single patients had better BCSS (AHR 0.9096, 95% CI: 0.8796-0.9406, P < 0.001). Married patients kept better prognosis among all age subgroups, while the better BCSS of single patients occurred only in groups older than 35 years. As for race and hormone receptor status (HRs), the better BCSS of single patients was only observed in white race (AHR 0.881, 95% CI: 0.8457-0.9177, P < 0.001) and patients with ER+/PR + status (AHR 0.8844, 95% CI: 0.8393-0.932, P < 0.001).

conclusionOur findings demonstrated that married and single patients with breast cancer had better prognosis than their DSW counterparts. Age, race, and HRs could affect the correlation between marital status and BCSS.

Indexed as

AdultBreast NeoplasmsBreast Neoplasms, MaleFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMarital StatusMiddle AgedPrognosisReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneSEER ProgramUnited StatesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, Progesteronebreast cancermarital statusprognosisSEER

Identifiers

PMID31267686
PMCPMC6712463
OpenAlexW2956016057

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.