SynthesisBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2026
Antipsychotic therapy and breast cancer risk: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWhile studies have shown a possible link between antipsychotic medication and the development of breast cancer, results remain inconclusive. The aim of the study was to assess the relationship between antipsychotic therapy and breast cancer risk, providing relevant determinative insights.
methodsA systematic database search was conducted in PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library databases, along with a manual search of references, until October 13th, 2025, for literature on studies investigating the association between antipsychotic therapy and breast cancer in women. Primary analysis involved an overall hazard ratio meta-analysis, with secondary odds ratio analysis for complementary evidence. Further subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses aimed to address heterogeneity and examine any potential association between the factors that varied, and the outcomes reported. The present meta-analysis was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
resultsSeventeen studies with 3,347,235 patients were included. Results support that exposure to antipsychotics leads to an overall 21% increased risk for breast cancer (HR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.03-1.42) compared to no exposure, which was more pronounced among retrospective studies. Furthermore, prolactin (PRL)-increasing antipsychotics pose an elevated risk (HR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.08-1.40) compared to PRL-sparing or none. Additionally, prolonged duration of therapy overall was associated with increased breast cancer risk (> 5 years: HR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.22-1.76), when compared to therapy for less than 1 year. Furthermore, first generation antipsychotics (FGAs) showed a significant association with duration (OR: 1.46, 95%CI 1.32-1.62), although second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) had no statistically significant results (OR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.94-1.25).
conclusionThere is a statistically significant association between breast cancer risk in women and the use of antipsychotics. PRL-increasing medications seem to have a higher correlation with breast cancer risk compared to PRL-sparing drugs. Longer duration of exposure to FGAs results in a higher risk of breast cancer. While these findings are hypothesis-generating, they underline the need for definitive prospective studies accounting for confounding factors. Careful consideration of medical history is required when choosing antipsychotic therapy to optimize both effectiveness and safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41307631What 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.