ArticleHealth science reports2026
Prognostic Value of Different Biological Age Estimation Methods in Breast Cancer Patients: A Population-Based Cohort Study Using NHANES 1999-2020.
Article in Health science reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women, and advanced biological ageing correlates with increased incidence. However, the prognostic value of comprehensive biological age biomarkers remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the association between composite biological age indices and mortality in breast cancer patients. Methods: We analyzed data from 399 breast cancer participants in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999-2020). Three biological age indicators were calculated using 12 blood-based biomarkers: Phenotypic Age (PA), Homeostatic Dysregulation (HD), and the Klemera-Doubal Method (KDM). Survey-weighted Cox models estimated hazard ratios (HR) for all-cause mortality. Restricted cubic splines assessed linearity, and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves evaluated predictive performance. Results: During a median follow-up of 6.67 years, 144 deaths occurred. In fully adjusted models, higher indices were associated with increased mortality risk: HD (HR = 1.465, 95% CI: 1.169-1.836), KDM (HR = 1.017, 95% CI: 1.004-1.030), and PA (HR = 1.080, 95% CI: 1.023-1.140). Spline analyses confirmed linear associations. ROC analyses revealed a time-stratified predictive capacity, finding that HD performed best for short-term prediction, whereas PA showed superior efficacy for mid- to long-term prognosis. Conclusion: Accelerated biological ageing is an independent predictor of mortality in breast cancer patients. The distinct time-specific utilities of HD and PA suggest that biological age indicators may guide personalized risk stratification and clinical management.
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.