Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32778072›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2020

Prognosis of pregnancy-associated breast cancer: a meta-analysis.

Chunchun Shao, Zhigang Yu, Juan Xiao, Liyuan Liu, Fanzhen Hong, Yuan Zhang, Hongying Jia

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Management and treatment of breast cancer in pregnant women.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  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

7 authors.

Chunchun ShaoCenter of Evidence-based Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250033, Shandong, PR China.
Zhigang YuDepartment of Breast Surgery, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250033, Shandong, PR China.
Juan XiaoCenter of Evidence-based Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250033, Shandong, PR China.
Liyuan LiuDepartment of Breast Surgery, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250033, Shandong, PR China.
Fanzhen HongDepartment of Obstetrics, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250033, Shandong, PR China.
Yuan ZhangClinical Epidemiology Unit, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, Shandong, PR China. ebmzhangyuan@yeah.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0527-6017
Hongying JiaCenter of Evidence-based Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, 250033, Shandong, PR China. jiahongying@sdu.edu.cn.

Funding

Youth Talent Fund of the Second Hospital of Shandong University 2018YT26
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnancy-associated breast cancer (PABC) is defined as breast cancer that is diagnosed during pregnancy and/or the postpartum period. Definitions of the duration of the postpartum period have been controversial, and this variability may lead to diverse results regarding prognosis. Moreover, evidence on the dose-response association between the time from the last pregnancy to breast cancer diagnosis and overall mortality has not been synthesized.

methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for observational studies on the prognosis of PABC published up to June 1, 2019. We estimated summary-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses based on diagnosis time, PABC definition, geographic region, year of publication and estimation procedure for HR were performed. Additionally, dose-response analysis was conducted by using the variance weighted least-squares regression (VWLS) trend estimation.

resultsA total of 54 articles (76 studies) were included in our study. PABC was associated with poor prognosis for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and cause-specific survival (CSS), and the pooled HRs with 95% CIs were 1.45 (1.30-1.63), 1.39 (1.25-1.54) and 1.40 (1.17-1.68), respectively. The corresponding reference category was non-PABC patients. According to subgroup analyses, the varied definition of PABC led to diverse results. The dose-response analysis indicated a nonlinear association between the time from the last delivery to breast cancer diagnosis and the HR of overall mortality (P < 0.001). Compared to nulliparous women, the mortality was almost 60% higher in women with PABC diagnosed at 12 months after the last delivery (HR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.30-1.82), and the mortality was not significantly different at 70 months after the last delivery (HR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.99-1.25). This finding suggests that the definition of PABC should be extended to include patients diagnosed up to approximately 6 years postpartum (70 months after the last delivery) to capture the increased risk.

conclusionThis meta-analysis suggests that PABC is associated with poor prognosis, and the definition of PABC should be extended to include patients diagnosed up to approximately 6 years postpartum.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsConfidence IntervalsDelivery, ObstetricDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansLeast-Squares AnalysisParityPregnancyPregnancy Complications, NeoplasticPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsTime FactorsDose-responseMeta-analysisPregnancy-associated breast cancerPrognosisSurvival

Identifiers

PMID32778072
PMCPMC7418189

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.