ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2025
Medications to reduce breast cancer risk: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGiven the rising incidence of breast cancer, especially in premenopausal women, there is an urgent need to identify additional risk-reducing medications to accelerate prevention, as only a few are currently approved. We, therefore, performed network meta-analysis (NMA) to identify and compare the efficacy of medications for primary breast cancer prevention.
methodsWe performed a literature search completed on November 16, 2023, in Embase, Ovid-Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating risk-reducing medications in women without a history of invasive breast cancer. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data based on predefined criteria, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, and assessed the risk of bias using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The primary outcome was overall breast cancer incidence, with secondary outcomes including invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ. NMA was performed using a random-effects model, measuring efficacy with risk ratios (RR) and number needed to treat (NNT). Medications were ranked using the Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve (SUCRA). We performed subgroup analyses by menopause status, primary versus secondary/other outcomes, follow-up, and intervention duration.
resultsOut of 8,598 studies screened, 43 RCTs (n = 337,240 women) met inclusion criteria. Six medications reduced overall breast cancer risk compared to placebo: sulfonylurea (RR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.04-0.91, NNT = 44.1, SUCRA = 0.90), thiazolidinediones (RR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.08-0.78, NNT = 48.3, SUCRA = 0.80), third-generation selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) (RR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.33-0.66, NNT = 67.3, SUCRA = 0.62), aromatase inhibitors (AIs) (RR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.39-0.66, NNT = 73.0, SUCRA = 0.55), raloxifene (RR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.47-0.84, NNT = 96.9, SUCRA = 0.37), and tamoxifen (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.65-0.88, NNT = 149.7, SUCRA = 0.23). AIs (RR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.33-0.71), tamoxifen (RR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.51-0.78), and raloxifene (RR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.47-0.86), were effective for invasive breast cancer. Third-generation SERMs (RR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.32-0.67), AIs (RR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.40-0.64), raloxifene (RR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.46-0.82), and tamoxifen (RR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.66-0.86) were effective in studies with breast cancer as a primary outcome, while thiazolidinediones (RR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.07-0.84) were effective in studies with breast cancer as a secondary/other outcome.
conclusionsThis NMA confirms the efficacy of tamoxifen, raloxifene, and AIs, and identifies thiazolidinediones and third-generation SERMs as promising agents for breast cancer prevention, though not currently included in guidelines. These findings extend prior evidence and highlight the need for trials in premenopausal and racially diverse populations to address existing gaps.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.