ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2026
Determinants of stage at breast cancer diagnosis across different healthcare systems: an international multicentre cohort study.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBreast cancer stage at diagnosis varies across populations and healthcare settings. We aimed to identify factors independently associated with stage III disease across different healthcare contexts.
methodsWe conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients with stage I-III invasive breast cancer diagnosed between January 1 and December 31, 2025, at four tertiary institutions in Spain, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Panama. The primary outcome was stage III versus stage I-II disease. Multivariable logistic regression assessed age, country, molecular subtype, and diagnostic method. A sensitivity analysis replaced diagnostic method with routine screening. Model discrimination and calibration were assessed.
resultsAmong 918 patients initially identified, 843 were included; 632 (75.0%) had stage I-II and 211 (25.0%) stage III disease. Stage III prevalence ranged from 11.1% in Panama to 51.6% in Guatemala. Compared with Luminal A, Luminal B (adjusted OR [aOR], 2.28; 95% CI, 1.45-3.58), HER2-positive (non-luminal) (aOR, 4.01; 95% CI, 2.37-6.79), and triple-negative tumours (aOR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.06-3.43) were associated with higher odds of stage III disease. Guatemala was also strongly associated with stage III presentation (aOR, 4.08; 95% CI, 2.68-6.20). Diagnostic method was not independently associated (aOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.94-1.94). In the sensitivity analysis (n=789), routine screening was not independently associated with stage III disease (aOR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.64-1.35). The model showed an AUROC of 0.764 (95% CI, 0.733-0.806).
conclusionsStage III presentation was independently associated with molecular subtype and participating country/centre. Reducing advanced-stage disease may require integrated strategies addressing tumour biology, screening, timely diagnosis, and healthcare-system factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42758419What 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.