Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

475 questions · 487 findings · 49 reviews · Breast Cancer

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 44 · 9%GRADE not reported 14 · 2.9%Very low 108 · 22.2%Low 128 · 26.3%Moderate 107 · 22%High 86 · 17.7%

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Quality of life · women with metastatic breast cancer with bone metastases

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
5 studies · 1888 participants
Moderate

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Overall survival · women with early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates leads to lower overall survival compared with placebo/observation (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 0.91 [0.83, 0.99]
9 studies · 13949 participants
High

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Overall survival postmenopausal women · women with early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates leads to lower overall survival postmenopausal women compared with placebo/observation (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 0.77 [0.66, 0.9]
4 studies · 6048 participants
High

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Overall survival: pre‐ or perimenopausal women · women with early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates showed no clear difference in overall survival: pre‐ or perimenopausal women compared with placebo/observation (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 1.03 [0.86, 1.22]
2 studies · 3501 participants
High

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Disease‐free progression · women with early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates showed no clear difference in disease‐free progression compared with placebo/observation (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 0.94 [0.87, 1.02]
7 studies · 12578 participants
High

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Disease‐free progression: postmenopausal women · women with early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates leads to lower disease‐free progression: postmenopausal women compared with placebo/observation (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 0.82 [0.74, 0.91]
7 studies · 8314 participants
High

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Disease‐free progression: pre‐ or perimenopausal women · women with early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates showed no clear difference in disease‐free progression: pre‐ or perimenopausal women compared with placebo/observation (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 1.01 [0.9, 1.13]
4 studies · 5493 participants
High

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Incidence of fractures · women with early breast cancer

Bisphosphonates showed no clear difference in fracture incidence compared with placebo/observation (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.77 [0.54, 1.08]
6 studies · 7602 participants
Moderate

Bisphosphonates vs placebo/observation

Adverse events: osteonecrosis of the jaw · women with early breast cancer

1 finding from 1 review

Bisphosphonates and other bone agents for breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
9 studies · 13242 participants
High

No axillary surgery vs full axillary surgery

All‐cause mortality · women with operable primary breast cancer

No axillary surgery showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality compared with full axillary surgery (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 1.06 [0.96, 1.17]
10 studies · 3849 participants
Moderate

Sentinel node biopsy vs full axillary surgery

Paraesthesia · women with operable primary breast cancer

Sentinel node biopsy may leads to lower paraesthesia compared with full axillary surgery (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.15 [0.09, 0.23]
2 studies · 495 participants
Low

Sentinel node biopsy vs full axillary surgery

Pain · women with operable primary breast cancer

Sentinel node biopsy may leads to lower pain compared with full axillary surgery (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.44 [0.3, 0.67]
2 studies · 877 participants
Low

Sentinel node biopsy vs full axillary surgery

Numbness · women with operable primary breast cancer

Sentinel node biopsy probably leads to lower numbness compared with full axillary surgery (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.43 [0.34, 0.54]
3 studies · 1799 participants
Moderate

Radiotherapy vs full axillary surgery

All‐cause mortality · women with operable primary breast cancer

Radiotherapy alone showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality compared with full axillary surgery (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 1.1 [1, 1.21]
4 studies · 2469 participants
High

Radiotherapy vs full axillary surgery

Local recurrence · women with operable primary breast cancer

Radiotherapy alone leads to lower local recurrence compared with full axillary surgery (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 0.8 [0.64, 0.99]
4 studies · 22256 participants
High

No axillary surgery vs full axillary surgery

Locoregional recurrence · women with operable primary breast cancer

No axillary surgery probably leads to higher locoregional recurrence compared with full axillary surgery (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 2.35 [1.91, 2.89]
5 studies · 20863 participants
Moderate

No axillary surgery vs full axillary surgery

Lymphoedema Increase in arm circumference · women with operable primary breast cancer

No axillary surgery may leads to lower lymphoedema Increase in arm circumference compared with full axillary surgery (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.31 [0.23, 0.43]
4 studies · 1714 participants
Low

No axillary surgery vs full axillary surgery

Arm or shoulder movement impairment · women with operable primary breast cancer

It is very uncertain whether no axillary surgery changes arm or shoulder movement impairment compared with full axillary surgery (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.72 [0.49, 1.05]
5 studies · 1495 participants
Very low

Axillary sampling vs full axillary surgery

All‐cause mortality · women with operable primary breast cancer

Axillary sampling showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality compared with full axillary surgery (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 0.94 [0.73, 1.21]
3 studies · 967 participants
Low

Axillary sampling vs full axillary surgery

Local recurrence · women with operable primary breast cancer

Axillary sampling showed no clear difference in local recurrence compared with full axillary surgery (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Axillary treatment for operable primary breast cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 1.41 [0.94, 2.12]
3 studies · 1404 participants
Low