Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36533539›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2023

Breast cancer risk for women with diabetes and the impact of metformin: A meta-analysis.

Yifan Lu, Ali Hajjar, Vincent L Cryns, Amy Trentham-Dietz, Ronald E Gangnon, Brandy M Heckman-Stoddard, Oguzhan Alagoz

Open access · goldFull text readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Nomogram for reducing unnecessary biopsies of breast lesions based on MRI and clinical features: a multi-center retrospective cohort study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yifan LuDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Ali HajjarMassachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology Assessment, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Vincent L CrynsDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Amy Trentham-DietzDepartment of Population Health Sciences and the Carbone Cancer Center, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Ronald E GangnonDepartments of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics and Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Brandy M Heckman-StoddardDivision of Cancer Prevention of the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Oguzhan AlagozDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering and Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5133-1382
University of Wisconsin–Madison · USHarvard University · USNational Cancer Institute · USUniversity of Wisconsin System · US

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · 1985 to 2025
$35.4M
Comparative Modeling of Precision Breast Cancer Control Across the Translational Continuum Administrative SupplementU01CA253911 · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · 2025 to 2025
$567k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NCI NIH HHS U01 CA253911
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetes mellitus has been associated with increased breast cancer (BC) risk; however, the magnitude of this effect is uncertain. This study focused on BC risk for women with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

methodsTwo separate meta-analyses were conducted (1) to estimate the relative risk (RR) of BC for women with T2DM and (2) to evaluate the risk of BC for women with T2DM associated with the use of metformin, a common diabetes treatment. In addition, subgroup analyses adjusting for obesity as measured by body mass index (BMI) and menopausal status were also performed. Studies were identified via PubMed/Scopus database and manual search through April 2021.

resultsA total of 30 and 15 studies were included in the first and second meta-analyses, respectively. The summary RR of BC for women with T2DM was 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.21). The subgroup analyses adjusting BMI and adjusting BMI and menopause resulted in a summary RR of 1.22 (95% CI, 1.15-1.30) and 1.20 (95% CI, 1.05-1.36), respectively. For women with T2DM, the summary RR of BC was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.60-1.12) for metformin users compared with nonmetformin users.

conclusionsWomen with T2DM were more likely to be diagnosed with BC and this association was strengthened by adjusting for BMI and menopausal status. No statistically significant reduction of BC risk was observed among metformin users. IMPACT: These two meta-analyses can inform decision-making for women with type 2 diabetes regarding their use of metformin and the use of screening mammography for early detection of breast cancer.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2MetforminEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansHypoglycemic AgentsMammographyRiskHypoglycemic AgentsMetforminbreast cancerdiabetesmeta-analysismetformintype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID36533539
PMCPMC10242307
OpenAlexW4311931015

What Socratic holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.