↓ Skip to main content

Worse Breast Cancer Prognosis of BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: What's the Evidence? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
14 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
92 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
Title
Worse Breast Cancer Prognosis of BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: What's the Evidence? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0120189
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexandra J. van den Broek, Marjanka K. Schmidt, Laura J. van ‘t Veer, Rob A. E. M. Tollenaar, Flora E. van Leeuwen

Abstract

Conflicting conclusions have been published regarding breast cancer survival of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Here we provide an evidence-based systematic literature review. Eligible publications were observational studies assessing the survival of breast cancer patients carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation compared to non-carriers or the general breast cancer population. We performed meta-analyses and best-evidence syntheses for survival outcomes taking into account study quality assessed by selection bias, misclassification bias and confounding. Sixty-six relevant studies were identified. Moderate evidence for a worse unadjusted recurrence-free survival for BRCA1 mutation carriers was found. For BRCA1 and BRCA2 there was a tendency towards a worse breast cancer-specific and overall survival, however, results were heterogeneous and the evidence was judged to be indecisive. Surprisingly, only 8 studies considered adjuvant treatment as a confounder or effect modifier while only two studies took prophylactic surgery into account. Adjustment for tumour characteristics tended to shift the observed risk estimates towards a relatively more favourable survival. In contrast to currently held beliefs of some oncologists, current evidence does not support worse breast cancer survival of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers in the adjuvant setting; differences if any are likely to be small. More well-designed studies are awaited.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Unknown 126 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 19%
Student > Master 14 11%
Researcher 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 9%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 35 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 33 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 33. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2021.
All research outputs
#1,128,193
of 24,059,832 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#14,766
of 206,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,884
of 267,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#365
of 6,409 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,059,832 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 206,522 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,409 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.