ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2022
Mammographic breast density and survival in women with invasive breast cancer.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Breast density notification.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe explored the under-debate association between mammographic breast density (MBD) and survival.
methodsFrom the Piedmont Cancer Registry, we identified 693 invasive breast cancer (BC) cases. We analyzed the overall survival in strata of MBD through the Kaplan-Meier method. Using the Cox proportional hazards model, we estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) of death; using the cause-specific hazards regression model, we estimated the HRs of BC-related and other causes of death. Models included term for Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) MBD (categorized as BI-RADS 1 and BI-RADS 2-4) and were adjusted for selected patient and tumour characteristics.
resultsThere were 102 deaths, of which 49 were from BC. After 5 years, the overall survival was 69% in BI-RADS 1 and 88% in BI-RADS 2-4 (p < 0.01). Compared to BI-RADS 2-4, the HRs of death for BI-RADS 1 were 1.65 (95% CI 1.06-2.58) in the crude model and 1.35 (95% CI 0.84-2.16) in the fully adjusted model. Compared to BI-RADS 2-4, the fully adjusted HRs for BI-RADS 1 were 1.52 (95% CI 0.74-3.13) for BC-related death and 1.83 (95% CI 0.84-4.00) for the other causes of death.
conclusionHigher MBD is one of the strongest independent risk factors for BC, but it seems not to have an unfavorable impact on survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35696000What 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.