ReviewPrzeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review2025
Tamoxifen treatment in breast cancer: diagnostic methods for endometrial changes.
Review in Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to review publications on the early, most accurate diagnosis of pathological changes in the endometrium, which occur during and after tamoxifen (TAM) therapy for breast cancer (BC). Accurate diagnosis of potential endometrial lesions is essential to make correct decisions regarding the necessity of adjuvant therapy with TAM. MEDLINE (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed), EMBASE (http://www.embase.com) and Scopus (http://www.scopus.com) databases were searched using the following MeSH terms in titles and abstracts: ("tamoxifen endometrial hyperplasia" OR "tamoxifen endometrial pathology" OR "endometrial pathology tamoxifen"). No language restriction was used in the literature search. The search was limited to studies in humans. The results of an ultrasound investigation of the endometrium in asymptomatic BC patients receiving TAM should be interpreted with caution. An overdiagnosis of endometrial abnormalities, and the consequent unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures could discourage some patients from continuing the adjuvant treatment with TAM, putting them at increased risk of recurrent BC. There is no evidence that patients receiving adjuvant TAM therapy could benefit from a screening program based on the ultrasound examination alone. Asymptomatic BC patients on adjuvant TAM-treatment should not be submitted routinely to ultrasound examination or biopsy, but encouraged to report any abnormal vaginal bleeding promptly.
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.