ArticleScientific reports2025
Long-term trends in the incidence of male breast cancer and nomogram for predicting survival in male breast cancer patients: a population-based epidemiologic study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Male Breast Cancer: An Analysis of Clinicopathological Features, Treatment Patterns, and Survival Outcomes over 10 Years from a Tertiary Center.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Trends in male breast cancer in Spain, 1999-2023: a nationwide analysis of incidence and mortality.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Large Language Models for Breast and Cervical Cancers Communication: Mixed Methods Evaluation Study Assessing Linguistic Quality, Safety, and Accessibility.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Current Perspectives on Non-Metastatic Male Breast Cancer: Genetics, Biology, and Treatment Advances: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Sex-Based Differences in Medullary Thyroid Cancer Survival: A Matched Analysis of 4602 Patients.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Real-world assessment of thromboembolic risk associated with tamoxifen.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Survival Trends of Male Breast Cancer in the United States: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Prognostic nomogram for overall survival in pediatric osteosarcoma with pulmonary metastases: a SEER database analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Male breast cancer (MBC) is rare, and due to the absence of male-specific screening programs, many patients are diagnosed at advanced stages and older ages. This study aims to analyze the long-term trend of MBC incidence and develop a competing risk model to improve survival rates. MBC data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (1975-2019) were analyzed using the Age-Period-Cohort (APC) model to examine trends in age, period, and birth cohort effects of MBC incidence. A competing risk model was used to build a nomogram predicting breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) for MBC patients, with model accuracy assessed using the concordance index (C-index) and calibration curves. These results were compared with the nomogram established by Cox model. Comparisons were made with traditional AJCC staging system using net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). APC analysis showed MBC incidence increases with age, while period and birth cohort effects were not significant. A total of 2,057 patients were included in the competing risk analysis, which identified factors like older age, estrogen receptor (ER) negative, progesterone receptor (PR) negative, and advanced AJCC stage as being associated with shorter survival. The competing risk model demonstrated excellent predictive ability, surpassing the AJCC staging system in both accuracy and clinical utility. In contrast, the Cox regression model overestimated the risk of endpoint events and failed to provide accurate effect estimates. The high incidence and poor prognosis of MBC in the elderly population emphasize the need for improved screening and early diagnosis in high-risk groups. Our competing risk model, compared to the Cox model, more accurately reflects real-world conditions. Additionally, we have developed a competing risk nomogram to assist in identifying high-risk individuals and guiding clinical decision-making.
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.