ArticleBMC cancer2021
Cardiovascular events and mortality in a population-based cohort initially diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ.
Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Breast cancer in Trinidad and Tobago: Etiopathogenesis, histopathology and receptor study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuctal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients are usually diagnosed through cancer screening programs, suggesting a healthy user effect. In this population-based cohort, we assessed the risk of cardiovascular events and mortality in DCIS patients.
methodsUsing the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, 13,740 women, who were initially diagnosed with DCIS between 2007 and 2013, were analyzed. A control group was matched according to age and the year of diagnosis at a 3:1 ratio (n = 41,220). Follow-up was performed until 2016. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the subsequent diagnosis of invasive breast cancer within 1 year: pure DCIS and DCIS+Invasive group.
resultsDCIS patients were more likely to have underlying diseases, higher incomes, and to live in urban districts compared to the control group. Women diagnosed of DCIS had lower myocardial infarct risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.90) and lower stroke risk (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.60-0.98) compared to the control group. This trend of lower risk was sustained after adjusting for age, income, residence and comorbidities. The mortality rate was similar between the control group and pure DCIS patients but was higher in the DCIS+Invasive group (HR 1.63; 95% CI 1.34-1.98). However, after adjusting for age, income, residence and comorbidities, mortality did not differ between the control group and DCIS+Invasive group (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.78-1.24).
conclusionsDCIS patients were at lower risk for MI and stroke compared to a control group despite a higher rate of comorbidities, which may reflect changes in health behaviour. The importance of managing pre-existing comorbidities along with DCIS treatment should be emphasized.
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.