↓ Skip to main content

Progesterone vs. synthetic progestins and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Progesterone vs. synthetic progestins and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Systematic Reviews, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13643-016-0294-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noor Asi, Khaled Mohammed, Qusay Haydour, Michael R. Gionfriddo, Oscar L. Morey Vargas, Larry J. Prokop, Stephanie S. Faubion, Mohammad Hassan Murad

Abstract

Use of menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT)-containing estrogen and a synthetic progestin is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. It is unclear if progesterone in combination with estrogen carries a lower risk of breast cancer. Limited data suggest differences between progesterone and progestins on cardiovascular risk factors, including cholesterol and glucose metabolism. Whether this translates to differences in cardiovascular outcomes is uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize the existing evidence about the effect of progesterone in comparison to synthetic progestins, each in combination with estrogens, on the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular events. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus through 17 May 2016 for studies that enrolled postmenopausal women using progesterone vs. synthetic progestins and reported the outcomes of interest. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random effects model. We included two cohort studies and one population-based case-control study out of 3410 citations identified by the search. The included studies enrolled 86,881 postmenopausal women with mean age of 59 years and follow-up range from 3 to 20 years. The overall risk of bias of the included cohort studies in the meta-analysis was moderate. There was no data on cardiovascular events. Progesterone was associated with lower breast cancer risk compared to synthetic progestins when each is given in combination with estrogen, relative risk 0.67; 95 % confidence interval 0.55-0.81. Observational studies suggest that in menopausal women, estrogen and progesterone use may be associated with lower breast cancer risk compared to synthetic progestin.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Researcher 10 10%
Other 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 24 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 19 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,402,293
of 20,048,249 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#241
of 1,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,838
of 277,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,048,249 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 277,117 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.