OFS vs no OFS: Toxicity ‐ bone health (osteoporosis defined by a T score < ‐2.5)
OFS may leads to higher toxicity ‐ bone health (osteoporosis defined by a T score < ‐2.5) compared with no OFS (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
OFS vs no OFS Toxicity ‐ bone health (osteoporosis defined by a T score < ‐2.5) · women with early breast cancer OFS may leads to higher toxicity ‐ bone health (osteoporosis defined by a T score < ‐2.5) compared with no OFS (low certainty). Ovarian suppression for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor‐positive early breast cancer (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.66 [1.1, 2.5] | 1 study · 2011 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ovarian suppression for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor‐positive early breast cancer 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.