ReviewSkin health and disease2021
Sex disparity in skin carcinogenesis and potential influence of sex hormones.
Review in Skin health and disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pro-Carcinogenic Implications of Folic Acid Supplementation During Chemically Induced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma in Mice.Journal of biochemical and molecular toxicology · 2026Article
- Surgical Outcomes and Histopathological Risk Factors in Periocular Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Single-Centre Study of 100 Patients.Turkish journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Attention guided fair artificial intelligence modeling for skin cancer diagnosis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Ultraviolet radiation exposure and melanoma risk among over 2 million Ontario workers.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Fitzpatrick Skin Phototype Is Independently Associated with Differential Short-Term Cutaneous Reactivity Following Standardized Topical Provocation in Humans.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Genital basal cell carcinoma in sun-protected sites: sex-stratified clinicopathologic features, p16/HPV status, and long-term outcomes in an Asian cohort.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Environmental greenery and skin cancer risk: a prospective cohort study on incidence and mediating mechanisms.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Epidemiology and socioeconomic factors of nonmelanoma skin cancer in the Middle East and North Africa 1990 to 2021.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Skin cancer prevention in the Polish population during the COVID-19 pandemic.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- A tEMTing target? Clinical and experimental evidence for epithelial-mesenchymal transition in the progression of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (a scoping systematic review).Discover oncology · 2022Article
- Hormones and Sex-Specific Medicine in Human Physiopathology.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- The Sex Differences in Uveal Melanoma: Potential Roles of EIF1AX, Immune Response and Redox Regulation.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sex or gender disparity in skin cancer has been documented for a long time at the population level. UV radiation (UVR) is a common environmental risk for all three major types of skin cancer: cutaneous melanoma (CM), basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). The underlying mechanism for sex disparity has been largely attributed to sex-differentiated behaviour patterns related to UVR. Non-UVR factors such as intrinsic physiological differences have been suggested but remain understudied. Aims Materials and Methods: This review summarizes and compares the known sex differences in three skin cancer types with regard to body site distribution and age influence. Results: We found a similar age-dependent sex difference pattern in CM and BCC. Specifically, CM and BCC tend to show higher incidence in young women and old men, with a switching age around menopause. The switching age suggests involvement of sex hormones, which has shown controversial influence on skin cancers at epidemiological level. Literatures regarding sex hormone receptors for oestrogen, androgen and progesterone are summarized for potential explanations at molecular level. Discussion: Overall, more and more evidence suggests non-UVR factors such as sex hormones play critical roles in skin cancer (especially CM and BCC), yet solid population and molecular evidence are required. Incidences of skin cancer are increasing which suggests limited effect for the current UVR-avoidance prevention methods. Conclusion: Fully understanding the causes of sex disparities in incidence is necessary for developing a comprehensive prevention strategy.
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.