Observational studyRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2023
Ancestry and self-reported race in Brazilian breast cancer women.
Observational study in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unraveling the enigma of long COVID: novel aspects in pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment protocols.Inflammopharmacology · 2024Review
- Comprehensive diagnosis of advanced-stage breast cancer: exploring detection methods, molecular subtypes, and demographic influences - A cross-sectional study.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the association between self-reported race/color and ancestry in Brazilian patients with breast cancer.
methodsThis was an observational, transversal, epidemiological study, evaluating race and ancestry in 1,127 patients with breast cancer. For genetic ancestry, a 46-AIM-INDEL panel was used. The ancestral profile was evaluated with the Structure v.2.3.3 software. Descriptive statistics were performed. To assess differences between race and ancestry, an analysis of variance with Bonferoni adjustment was used.
resultsThe race distribution was 77.7% white, 17.6% brown, 4.1% black, 0.4% yellow, and 0.3% cafuse. The African ancestry proportion was significantly (p<0.001) more evident in black [0.63±0.21 (0.17-0.96)], followed by brown [0.25±0.16 (0.02-0.70)], and less frequent in white skin color. The European ancestry proportion was significantly (p<0.001) higher in white [0.72±0.17 (0.02-0.97)], followed by brown [0.57±0.19 (0.12-0.92)], yellow [0.27±0.31 (0.12-0.620], and black [0.24±0.19 (0.02-0.72)]. The Asiatic ancestry proportion is significantly (p<0.001) higher in yellow [0.48±0.51 (0.04-0.93)]. The Amerindian ancestry proportion frequency was the least frequent in all groups, and cafuse patients did not express differences between all race groups. The brown race group presented differences in African and European ancestry.
conclusionAlthough we found many similarities between white European ancestry, black African ancestry, and yellow Asian ancestry, there is great miscegenation between patients. Although they can be labeled as having one race, they do present many ancestral genes that would allow their inclusion in another race group.
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.