ArticleBJS open2021
Primary lung cancer in women after previous breast cancer.
Article in BJS open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of previous extrapulmonary malignancies on survival of surgically treated primary lung cancer: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Lung cancer in non-smoking women (LCINSW): from risk factors to precision therapy.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2025Review
- Breast cancer as the first primary malignancy: clinical pathological characteristics of common cancer combinations.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Article
- Clinical characteristics and survival of breast cancer patients with extramammary malignancies in a single Asian center over the past 23 years.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Sex-divergent anatomic system concordance in second primary malignant neoplasms: a large-scale analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Diagnostic challenge and survival analysis of pulmonary oligometastases and primary lung cancer in breast cancer patients.Thoracic cancer · 2024Article
- Incidental detection of ground glass nodules and primary lung cancer in patients with breast cancer: prevalence and long-term follow-up on chest computed tomography.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- An Unexpected Diagnosis of Second Primary Malignancy in a Breast Cancer Survivor: A Case Report.Cureus · 2023Article
- Development of a Second Primary Lung Cancer Following a Primary Breast Cancer: A Case Series.Journal of investigative medicine high impact case reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer is the most common malignancy among women in the USA. Improved survival has resulted in increasing incidence of second primary malignancies, of which lung cancer is the most common. The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines for lung-cancer screening do not include previous malignancy as a high-risk feature requiring evaluation. The aim of this study was to compare women undergoing resection for lung cancer with and without a history of breast cancer and to assess whether there were differences in stage at diagnosis, survival and eligibility for lung-cancer screening between the two groups.
methodsWomen who underwent lung-cancer resection between 2000 and 2017 were identified. Demographic, clinicopathological, treatment and outcomes data were compared between patients with a history of breast cancer (BC-Lung) and patients without a history of breast cancer (P-Lung) before lung cancer.
resultsOf 2192 patients included, 331 (15.1 per cent) were in the BC-Lung group. The most common method of lung-cancer diagnosis in the BC-Lung group was breast-cancer surveillance or work-up imaging. Patients in the BC-Lung group had an earlier stage of lung cancer at the time of diagnosis. Five-year overall survival was not statistically significantly different between groups (73.3 per cent for both). Overall, 58.4 per cent of patients (1281 patients) had a history of smoking, and 33.3 per cent (731 patients) met the current criteria for lung-cancer screening.
conclusionDifferences in stage at diagnosis of lung cancer and treatment selection were observed between patients with and without a history of breast cancer. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences in genomic or oncogenic pathway alterations between the two groups, which suggests that lung cancer in patients who previously had breast cancer may not be affected at the genomic level by the previous breast cancer. The most important finding of the study was that a high percentage of women with lung cancer, regardless of breast-cancer history, did not meet the current USPSTF criteria for lung-cancer screening.
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.