SynthesisCardiology2025
Risk of Cancer in Patients with Congenital Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere has been remarkable progress in both diagnosis and treatment of patients with congenital heart disease (CHD), with an increasing number of survivors. Whether patients with CHD are more likely to develop cancer is still a controversial issue. This study aimed to quantitatively estimate the association between patients with CHD and the risk of developing cancer through meta-analysis.
methodsWeb of Science, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched from inception to September 2023 to identify potentially relevant case-control studies and cohort studies that reported risk estimates and confidence intervals (CIs). RevMan software was used to analyze the pooled effect size and test for heterogeneity. The random effect and fixed effect models were applied to the study period. Egger's test was performed to examine publication bias.
resultsWe analyzed six studies, consisting of 2 case-control studies and 4 cohort studies comprising 276,124 participants. The overall pooled hazard risk for cancer in patients with CHD was 1.71 (95% CI: 1.28-2.28; p < 0.01), with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 97%, p < 0.01). The quantitative analysis of studies indicates that patients with CHD have an increased risk of developing cancer, even after adjusting for chromosomal disorders.
conclusionOur study highlights the importance of controlling modifiable factors in cancer prevention and emphasizes the need for health education for patients with CHD in primary care. Given the limited number of studies included in this analysis, further research is needed to accurately quantify the cancer risk of exposed versus unexposed CHD.
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.