ArticleCancer2025
Race-related subsequent breast events after ductal carcinoma in situ: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-based analysis.
Article in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subsequent breast cancer risk after benign breast biopsy in racially diverse women: Siteman Cancer Center.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Racial Disparity in Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Risk-Predictive and Actionable Biomarkers for Early Intervention.Cancers · 2026Review
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
Abstract
backgroundThe risk of subsequent ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer (IBC) has been evaluated in either breast after a DCIS diagnosis; this study modeled competing risks of ipsilateral and contralateral DCIS or IBC subtypes by self-reported race.
methodsA cohort of 198,827 women diagnosed with primary unilateral DCIS between 2000 and 2022 was identified from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results tumor registries. Competing subdistributional hazard ratio (sHR) models were used to estimate DCIS or IBC laterality-associated risks overall and for the estrogen receptor (ER+) or progesterone receptor (PR+) overexpressing (ER+/PR+) and ER-PR- expressing tumor subtypes. Cox models were used for subanalysis to estimate the overall risk of a second event (DCIS or IBC).
resultsWithin an average of 10 (±6.1) years of follow-up after the initial DCIS, 16,148 women had a subsequent event (25.7% DCIS; 74.3% IBC). Overall, compared with White women, Black women had an elevated risk of IBC for either tumor subtype, whereas Asian and Hispanic women had an elevated risk of ER-PR- IBC. For tumor aggressiveness by laterality, Black women had an elevated IBC risk in either breast for ER-PR- (sHR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.53-2.17 in the ipsilateral breast; sHR, 1.512; 95% CI, 1.24-1.86 in the contralateral breast), as did Hispanic and Asian women in the ipsilateral breast only (with stronger association vs. ER+/PR+) (p
conclusionsThese contemporary data reflect treatment patterns since 2000, which show an elevated risk of subsequent breast tumors in either breast among Black women after DCIS.
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.