ArticleBreast (Edinburgh, Scotland)2020
Differences in breast cancer risk after benign breast disease by type of screening diagnosis.
Article in Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breast Cancer Risk After Benign Breast Disease Among Racially Diverse Women: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Research square · 2026Article
- Polygenic risk scores stratify breast cancer risk among women with benign breast disease.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2025Article
- Understanding Benign Breast Disease and Subsequent Breast Cancer in Hispanic White Females: A Step Closer to Evidence-Based Management.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024Article
- Comparisons of assessment pathways after abnormal mammography screening in Denmark, Norway, and Spain.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
- Benign Breast Disease and Breast Cancer Risk in the Percutaneous Biopsy Era.JAMA surgery · 2024Article
- Fibrocystic breast disease with pleomorphic calcifications and segmental distribution: A case report.Radiology case reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Comprehensive serum lipidomic analyses reveal potential biomarkers for malignant breast cancer: A case-control study.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2023Article
- A review of the neurological complications of breast cancer.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Review
- The altering in sensory sensitivity: a current issue of female breast surgery.International journal of medical sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe aimed to assess differences in breast cancer risk across benign breast disease diagnosed at prevalent or incident screens. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study with data from 629,087 women participating in a long-standing population-based breast cancer screening program in Spain. Each benign breast disease was classified as non-proliferative, proliferative without atypia, or proliferative with atypia, and whether it was diagnosed in a prevalent or incident screen. We used partly conditional Cox hazard regression to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios of the risk of breast cancer.
resultsCompared with women without benign breast disease, the risk of breast cancer was significantly higher (p-value = 0.005) in women with benign breast disease diagnosed in an incident screen (aHR, 2.67; 95%CI: 2.24-3.19) than in those with benign breast disease diagnosed in a prevalent screen (aHR, 1.87; 95%CI: 1.57-2.24). The highest risk was found in women with a proliferative benign breast disease with atypia (aHR, 4.35; 95%CI: 2.09-9.08, and 3.35; 95%CI: 1.51-7.40 for those diagnosed at incident and prevalent screens, respectively), while the lowest was found in women with non-proliferative benign breast disease (aHR, 2.39; 95%CI: 1.95-2.93, and 1.63; 95%CI: 1.32-2.02 for those diagnosed at incident and prevalent screens, respectively).
conclusionOur study showed that the risk of breast cancer conferred by a benign breast disease differed according to type of screen (prevalent or incident). To our knowledge, this is the first study to analyse the impact of the screening type on benign breast disease prognosis.
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.