ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2022
Differences in breast cancer-risk factors between screen-detected and non-screen-detected cases (MCC-Spain study).
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing breast cancer screening strategies for women with different BMI levels in Ghana: A simulation-based study on BMI-dependent tumor growth model.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Estimating disparities in breast cancer screening programs towards mortality, case fatality, and DALYs across BRICS-plus.BMC medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe variation in breast cancer (BC)-risk factor associations between screen-detected (SD) and non-screen-detected (NSD) tumors has been poorly studied, despite the interest of this aspect in risk assessment and prevention. This study analyzes the differences in breast cancer-risk factor associations according to detection method and tumor phenotype in Spanish women aged between 50 and 69.
methodsWe examined 900 BC cases and 896 controls aged between 50 and 69, recruited in the multicase-control MCC-Spain study. With regard to the cases, 460 were detected by screening mammography, whereas 144 were diagnosed by other means. By tumor phenotype, 591 were HR+, 153 were HER2+, and 58 were TN. Lifestyle, reproductive factors, family history of BC, and tumor characteristics were analyzed. Logistic regression models were used to compare cases vs. controls and SD vs. NSD cases. Multinomial regression models (controls used as a reference) were adjusted for case analysis according to phenotype and detection method.
resultsTN was associated with a lower risk of SD BC (OR 0.30 IC 0.10-0.89), as were intermediate (OR 0.18 IC 0.07-0.44) and advanced stages at diagnosis (OR 0.11 IC 0.03-0.34). Nulliparity in postmenopausal women and age at menopause were related to an increased risk of SD BC (OR 1.60 IC 1.08-2.36; OR 1.48 IC 1.09-2.00, respectively). Nulliparity in postmenopausal women was associated with a higher risk of HR+ (OR 1.66 IC 1.15-2.40). Age at menopause was related to a greater risk of HR+ (OR 1.60 IC 1.22-2.11) and HER2+ (OR 1.59 IC 1.03-2.45) tumors.
conclusionReproductive risk factors are associated with SD BC, as are HR+ tumors. Differences in BC-risk factor associations according to detection method may be related to prevailing phenotypes among categories.
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.