ArticleCureus2021
Breast Cancer Patients at Increased Risk of Developing Type II Endometrial Cancer: Relative and Absolute Risk Estimation and Implications for Counseling.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tamoxifen use and risk of endometrial cancer in breast cancer patients: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Endometrial Cancer Risk Among GermlineJCO precision oncology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Breast cancer (BC) is a recognized risk factor for endometrial cancer (EC). Emerging literature indicates that it confers a higher risk of type II EC (T2EC) than type I EC (T1EC). Although some surgeons offer a prophylactic hysterectomy to BC patients referred for risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, insufficient evidence prevents this from being the standard practice. We aimed to quantify their absolute risk and relative risk (RR) of developing both EC subtypes and identify a higher-risk group that could be considered for prophylactic hysterectomy. Methodology This retrospective service evaluation compared patients diagnosed with BC between 2008 and 2014, who subsequently developed EC within 10 years to those who did not. Absolute risk and RR were calculated using the numbers of regional BC and EC cases within this group, alongside 2009 UK female population and EC incidence statistics. Binary logistic regression generated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for patient- and disease-specific variables. Results A total of 45 BC patients developed EC, 24 had T1EC and 21 had T2EC. Their RR of developing EC was greater than that of the general population (RR: 12.44, p < 0.0001). Notably, this was higher for T2EC (RR: 33.96, p < 0.001) than T1EC (RR: 8.63, p < 0.0001). Nonetheless, the absolute risk remained low. Tamoxifen exposure was significantly more prevalent among T2EC patients (adjusted OR: 79.61, p = 0.003). Increased age at BC diagnosis was associated with T1EC (adjusted OR: 1.10, p = 0.043) and T2EC (adjusted OR: 1.13, p = 0.03). Neither smoking status nor family history of BC was significantly associated with any outcome. Conclusion Women with BC were more likely to develop T2EC than T1EC, and although the absolute risk was low, the cumulative risk was substantial enough to warrant vigilance. Tamoxifen exposure was significantly predictive of EC, particularly T2EC, and might facilitate risk estimation. Older women at BC diagnosis who receive tamoxifen treatment should be screened and closely monitored for EC. However, given the limitations of normal screening methods for the detection of T2EC, counseling for a prophylactic hysterectomy should also be considered. Clarification of the menopausal status will help make more meaningful recommendations.
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.