ArticleJAMA network open2024
Pregnancy-Related Factors and Breast Cancer Risk for Women Across a Range of Familial Risk.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating machine learning and clinicopathological data to stratify survival risk in young women with localized breast cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Reproductive state controls transcription in the murine liver, with implications for breast cancer liver metastasis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Unveiling the Stroma: Reproductive Factors and the Tumor Microenvironment in African Breast Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- Pregnancy and the Risk for Cancer in Neurofibromatosis 1.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 2025Article
- Hair care product use among pregnant women of color: protocol for a feasibility educational intervention.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Few studies have investigated whether the associations between pregnancy-related factors and breast cancer (BC) risk differ by underlying BC susceptibility. Evidence regarding variation in BC risk is critical to understanding BC causes and for developing effective risk-based screening guidelines. Objective: To examine the association between pregnancy-related factors and BC risk, including modification by a of BC where scores are based on age and BC family history. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included participants from the prospective Family Study Cohort (ProF-SC), which includes the 6 sites of the Breast Cancer Family Registry (US, Canada, and Australia) and the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium (Australia). Analyses were performed in a cohort of women enrolled from 1992 to 2011 without any personal history of BC who were followed up through 2017 with a median (range) follow-up of 10 (1-23) years. Data were analyzed from March 1992 to March 2017. Exposures: Parity, number of full-term pregnancies (FTP), age at first FTP, years since last FTP, and breastfeeding. Main Outcomes and Measures: BC diagnoses were obtained through self-report or report by a first-degree relative and confirmed through pathology and data linkages. Cox proportional hazards regression models estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for each exposure, examining modification by PARS of BC. Differences were assessed by estrogen receptor (ER) subtype. Results: The study included 17 274 women (mean [SD] age, 46.7 [15.1] years; 791 African American or Black participants [4.6%], 1399 Hispanic or Latinx participants [8.2%], and 13 790 White participants [80.7%]) with 943 prospectively ascertained BC cases. Compared with nulliparous women, BC risk was higher after a recent pregnancy for those women with higher PARS (last FTP 0-5 years HR for interaction, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.13-2.07; P for interaction < .001). Associations between other exposures were limited to ER-negative disease. ER-negative BC was positively associated with increasing PARS and increasing years since last FTP (P for interaction < .001) with higher risk for recent pregnancy vs nulliparous women (last FTP 0-5 years HR for interaction, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.03-2.31). ER-negative BC was positively associated with increasing PARS and being aged 20 years or older vs less than 20 years at first FTP (P for interaction = .002) and inversely associated with multiparity vs nulliparity (P for interaction = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of women with no prior BC diagnoses, associations between pregnancy-related factors and BC risk were modified by PARS, with greater associations observed for ER-negative BC.
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.