Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36425551›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022

The incidence risk of breast and gynecological cancer by antidepressant use: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of epidemiological studies involving 160,727 patients.

Yanjia Zhuang, Xiaogang Pang, Yuchen Qi, Tianshu Zhang, Guimao Cao, Heming Xue, Yifan Xu, Shuoxin Xie, Yifan Liu, Yinuo Wang and 4 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Global epidemiology of epithelial ovarian cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yanjia ZhuangLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Xiaogang PangLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Yuchen QiSchool of health, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Tianshu ZhangLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Guimao CaoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Heming XueLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Yifan XuLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Shuoxin XieLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Yifan LiuLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Yinuo WangLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Yunxiao LiLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Ying XiongInnovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Yuanyuan LiLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Hui ShenLaboratory of Brain Science, Innovation Research Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective: Antidepressants are widely prescribed to treat depression and anxiety disorders that may become chronic conditions among women. Epidemiological studies have yielded inconsistent results on the correlation between antidepressant use and the incidence risk of female breast and gynecological cancer, along with uncertain dose-response relationship. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis to investigate the association. Methods: Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were systematically searched in January 2022, with no language limits. Random-effect models were used to calculate pooled effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals between studies. Linear and non-linear dose-response analyses were performed to evaluate the dose or duration of antidepressant use affecting the incidence risk of female breast and gynecological cancer. Further subgroup analyses were systematically performed by stratifying almost all study characteristics and important potential confounders, in order to further clarify and validate the important potential hypotheses regarding the biological mechanism underlying this association. Results: Based on a systematic literature search, 34 eligible studies (27 case-control studies and 7 cohort studies) involving 160,727 female breast and gynecological cancer patients found that antidepressant use did not increase the incidence risk of female breast and gynecological cancer (pooled OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.97, 1.04, Conclusion: This systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis found that antidepressant use did not increase the incidence risk of female breast and gynecological cancer and even decreased the incidence risk of ovarian cancer, along with a non-linear or linear dose-response relationship. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=313364, identifier CRD42022313364.

Indexed as

antidepressantbreast cancerdepressiondose–response analysisgynecological cancerincidencemeta-analysissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36425551
PMCPMC9680975
OpenAlexW4306160662

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.