Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35683517›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Aromatase Inhibitors and Risk of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Adverse Effects in Breast Cancer Patients-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Kamila Boszkiewicz, Agnieszka Piwowar, Paweł Petryszyn

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Aromatase enzyme: Paving the way for exploring aromatization for cardio-renal protection.Biomedicine & pharmacotherapy = Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Cardiotoxicity in breast cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kamila BoszkiewiczDepartment of Toxicology, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska Street 211, 50-556 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0363-9208
Agnieszka PiwowarDepartment of Toxicology, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska Street 211, 50-556 Wroclaw, Poland.
Paweł PetryszynDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Wroclaw Medical University, Borowska Street 211a, 50-556 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2397-7028
Wroclaw Medical University · PL

Funding

Ministry of Education and Science in the "Regional Initiative of Excellence" programme for the years 2019-2022 project number 016/RID/2018/19Ministry of Education and Science Poland 016/RID/2018/19
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been considered first-line therapy for patients with hormone-dependent breast cancer due to their high efficacy and good tolerability. However, AIs are not free of adverse events, and studies show that therapy with AIs is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and the development of insulin resistance and diabetes. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed and EMBASE up to 27 October 2020 for the prevalence of cardiovascular and/or metabolic adverse effects during treatment with AIs in postmenopausal women with breast cancer. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated and illustrated using forest plot charts. We performed separate analyses depending on trial design. Twenty two studies met the inclusion criteria. AIs were associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events, especially when we compared study arms in which AIs were used (alone or in sequence with TAM) with the arms in which TAM was used alone (OR = 1.16; 95%CI 1.04-1.30) or when comparing patients taking AIs alone to patients taking TAM alone or in sequence with AIs (OR = 1.24; 95%CI 1.11-1.38). A pooled analysis of five trials comparing adjuvant AIs to TAM showed the odds for arterial hypertension being 1.31 times higher for patients taking AIs; however, this did not reach statistical significance (OR = 1.31; 95%CI 0.47-3.65). We have not shown an increased risk of dyslipidemia or weight gain with the use of AIs. Our results suggest that postmenopausal women with breast cancer treated with AIs have an increased risk of cardiovascular events in comparison with TAM, potentially due more to a cardioprotective effect of the latter than the cardiotoxicity of AIs. We were unable to prove a similar association for hypertension, dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia or weight gain. Further high-quality RCTs and post-marketing safety observational studies are needed to definitively evaluate the impact of AIs on metabolic disorders in breast cancer patients.

Indexed as

adverse effectsaromatase inhibitorsbreast cancer

Identifiers

PMID35683517
PMCPMC9181297
OpenAlexW4281625678

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.