SynthesisThe breast journal2026
Defining Multiple Fibroadenomas: A Systematic Review of Clinical Characteristics and Management.
Synthesis in The breast journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Defining Multiple Fibroadenomas: A Systematic Review of Clinical Characteristics and Management.The breast journal · 2026Pooled it
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review systematically evaluates the published literature on multiple fibroadenomas (MFAs) of the breast, focusing on clinical presentation, diagnostic challenges, and treatment strategies. A systematic search of PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and Embase from 1948 to June 2025 was conducted using a Boolean search strategy following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Of the 409 studies initially screened, 43 met the inclusion criteria. The level of evidence was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines, and 72% were found to be of Levels 4 and 5. MFA most commonly affects adolescents. Bilateral involvement was observed in 64.6% of patients, and more than 10 lesions were present in 52% of cases. Risk factors included hormonal contraceptive use, family history, and cyclosporine therapy. Ultrasonography was the most common diagnostic tool, followed by MRI and FNAC. Treatment was mainly surgical, with recurrence noted in 15.4% of patients. There was no evidence to suggest that the risk of cancer in MFA was greater than that of solitary FA. The review highlights inconsistencies in MFA definitions and calls for consensus on diagnostic criteria, prospective research, and the creation of standardized treatment algorithms to improve care and outcomes for this particularly distressing subset of benign breast diseases.
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.