ArticleCardiovascular drugs and therapy2026
Metabolic Syndrome and Breast Cancer Risk: an Age-Dependent Paradox?
Article in Cardiovascular drugs and therapy, 2026. 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.
- Can It Be that Metabolic Syndrome Protect against Breast Cancer.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study by Kimoto et al. investigated the relationship between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and breast cancer incidence in a large Japanese cohort exceeding one million women, revealing an unexpected age-dependent pattern. Both pre-MetS and MetS were associated with a lower incidence of breast cancer, particularly in women younger than 50 years, whereas this association attenuated or reversed after 60 years of age. In our correspondence, we discuss potential biological and methodological explanations for this paradox. We highlight the importance of heterogeneity in MetS definitions (Japanese vs. modified ATP III), the role of menopausal status beyond chronological age, and possible confounding by screening behavior and competing cardiovascular mortality. While the authors' interpretation involving anovulatory cycles and adipose-derived estrogen provides a plausible mechanistic framework, we emphasize the need for analyses stratified by actual menopausal status, repeated measures of MetS components, and competing-risk modeling. Overall, the findings underscore the complex, age-modulated interaction between metabolic dysregulation and breast carcinogenesis, reinforcing the necessity of menopause-specific risk assessment and standardized MetS definitions in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41148525What 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.