Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31431499›Full record

ArticleCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2019

Risk versus Benefit of Chemoprevention among Raloxifene and Tamoxifen Users with a Family History of Breast Cancer.

Chelsea Anderson, Hazel B Nichols, Melissa House, Dale P Sandler

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Chelsea AndersonDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-6535-481X
Hazel B NicholsDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. hazel.nichols@unc.edu.
Melissa HouseWestat, Inc., Durham, North Carolina.
Dale P SandlerEpidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-6776-0018
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences · USWestat (United States) · US

Funding

Environmental and Genetic Risk Factors For Breast Cancer: The Sister StudyZIAES044005 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SANDLER, DALE P · 2009 to 2025
$22.7M
Cancer Control Education ProgramT32CA057726 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Melissa B Gilkey, Melissa A. Troester · 2017 to 2026
$3.7M
Genetic and Environmental Risk Factors for Breast Cancer: The Sister StudyZ01ES044005 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SANDLER, DALE P · 1999 to 2008
$1.3M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 ES044005NCI NIH HHS T32 CA057726
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tamoxifen and raloxifene have been approved for the primary prevention of breast cancer in high-risk women, but are associated with an increased risk of serious side effects. Few studies have characterized risk-benefit profiles for chemoprevention among women who initiate tamoxifen or raloxifene outside of a clinical trial setting. Use of raloxifene and tamoxifen for chemoprevention was self-reported in 2014 to 2016 by participants in The Sister Study, a prospective cohort of women with a sister who had been diagnosed with breast cancer. After exclusions, 432 current raloxifene users and 96 current tamoxifen users were matched to 4,307 and 953 nonusers, respectively, on age and year of cohort enrollment. Conditional logistic regression was used to evaluate characteristics associated with chemoprevention use. Risk-benefit profiles were examined using published indices that assess the level of evidence (none, moderate, strong) that the benefits of chemoprevention outweigh the risk of serious side effects. Among current chemoprevention users, 44% of tamoxifen users and 5% of raloxifene users had no evidence of a net benefit. In analyses of factors associated with chemoprevention use, having strong evidence of benefit was a significant predictor of raloxifene use, but not of tamoxifen use. In our sample of women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer, raloxifene was more commonly used for breast cancer prevention than tamoxifen. Most raloxifene users, but <60% of tamoxifen users, were likely to benefit. Use of risk-benefit tables can help women and their healthcare providers make an informed decision about breast cancer chemoprevention.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsEstrogen AntagonistsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesRaloxifene HydrochlorideRisk AssessmentTamoxifenEstrogen AntagonistsRaloxifene HydrochlorideTamoxifen

Identifiers

PMID31431499
PMCPMC6825574
OpenAlexW2969785250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.