Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
ImportanceA potential relationship between meningioma and breast cancer was suggested 70 years ago. However, to date, no conclusive evidence is available on this topic.ObjectiveTo provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the association of meningioma with breast cancer, supported by a meta-analysis.Data SourcesA systematic PubMed search was performed up to April 2023 to identify articles on the association of meningioma with breast cancer. The following key words were used strategically: meningioma, breast cancer, breast carcinoma, association, relation.Study SelectionAll studies reporting women diagnosed with meningioma and breast cancer were identified. The search strategy was not limited by study design or publication date but only included articles in English. Additional articles were identified via citation searching. Studies reporting a complete population of meningiomas or breast cancer patients throughout a specific study period and a proportion of patients with a second pathology could be used for the meta-analysis.Data Extraction and SynthesisData extraction was performed by 2 authors in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) statement. Meta-analyses regarding both populations were performed using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main measures were whether there was an increased prevalence of breast cancer in female patients with meningioma and whether there was an increased prevalence of meningioma in female patients with breast cancer.ResultsA total of 51 retrospective studies (case reports, case series, and cancer registry reports) describing 2238 patients with both diseases were identified; 18 studies qualified for prevalence analyses and meta-analysis. The random-effects meta-analysis (13 studies) revealed a significantly greater prevalence of breast cancer in female patients with meningioma than in the overall population (odds ratio [OR], 9.87; 95% CI, 7.31-13.32). Meningioma incidence in patients with breast cancer (11 studies) was greater than that in the baseline population; however, the difference according to the random-effects model was not statistically significant (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.99-2.02).Conclusions and RelevanceThis large systematic review and the meta-analysis on the association between meningioma and breast cancer found nearly 10-fold higher odds of breast cancer in female patients with meningioma compared with the general female population. These findings suggest that female patients with meningioma should be screened more intensively for breast cancer. Further research is required to identify the factors causing this association.
ImportanceA potential relationship between meningioma and breast cancer was suggested 70 years ago. However, to date, no conclusive evidence is available on this topic.ObjectiveTo provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the association of meningioma with breast cancer, supported by a meta-analysis.Data SourcesA systematic PubMed search was performed up to April 2023 to identify articles on the association of meningioma with breast cancer. The following key words were used strategically: meningioma, breast cancer, breast carcinoma, association, relation.Study SelectionAll studies reporting women diagnosed with meningioma and breast cancer were identified. The search strategy was not limited by study design or publication date but only included articles in English. Additional articles were identified via citation searching. Studies reporting a complete population of meningiomas or breast cancer patients throughout a specific study period and a proportion of patients with a second pathology could be used for the meta-analysis.Data Extraction and SynthesisData extraction was performed by 2 authors in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) statement. Meta-analyses regarding both populations were performed using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main measures were whether there was an increased prevalence of breast cancer in female patients with meningioma and whether there was an increased prevalence of meningioma in female patients with breast cancer.ResultsA total of 51 retrospective studies (case reports, case series, and cancer registry reports) describing 2238 patients with both diseases were identified; 18 studies qualified for prevalence analyses and meta-analysis. The random-effects meta-analysis (13 studies) revealed a significantly greater prevalence of breast cancer in female patients with meningioma than in the overall population (odds ratio [OR], 9.87; 95% CI, 7.31-13.32). Meningioma incidence in patients with breast cancer (11 studies) was greater than that in the baseline population; however, the difference according to the random-effects model was not statistically significant (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.99-2.02).Conclusions and RelevanceThis large systematic review and the meta-analysis on the association between meningioma and breast cancer found nearly 10-fold higher odds of breast cancer in female patients with meningioma compared with the general female population. These findings suggest that female patients with meningioma should be screened more intensively for breast cancer. Further research is required to identify the factors causing this association.
Background Although preceding observational research mentioned a potential connection between meningioma and breast cancer, verifying an unambiguous causal relationship has turned out problematic. Aiming to determine if breast cancer and the risk of meningioma intersect, we utilized a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis in this study. Besides, we investigated the influence of various estrogen receptor (ER) phenotypes on that association. Methods Breast cancer data from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC) coupled with meningioma data from the FinnGen cohort were adopted in our investigation. Total participants of European descent were divided into four groups: 228,951 individuals (122,977 cases of breast cancer and 105,974 controls), 175,475 individuals (69,501 cases of ER-positive breast cancer and 105,974 controls), 127,442 individuals (21,468 cases of ER-negative breast cancer and 105,974 controls), and 287,614 individuals (1.237 cases of meningioma and 286,377 controls). The MR research, which utilized the power of the inverse variance weighting (IVW), weighted median (WM), and MR-Egger means, used tightly opted instrumental SNPs that were profoundly connected with exposure. Results According to the results of our forward MR study, there was a significant causal correlation between total breast cancer on meningioma (MR-Egger: OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.05–1.90, P = 0.022; WM: OR = 1.3, 95% CI = 1.02–1.50, P = 0.0248; IVW: OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.05–1.4, P = 0.0075). Furthermore, there was a probable causative relationship among ER-positive (ER+) breast cancer on meningioma (IVW: OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03–1.30, P = 0.014), whereas no apparent connection between ER-negative breast cancer on meningioma emerged. Meningioma had little impact on the risk of breast cancer and breast cancer with different ER states, as shown to the inverse MR analysis drawing on the IVW, MR-Egger, and WM tests. Conclusion Following what comes of our forward MR investigation, there existed an unambiguous connection between the breast cancer in the population of European descent on meningioma. Likewise, we uncovered a potential combination referring to a causative relationship among ER + breast cancer on meningioma. However, there was no confirmation that suffering ER-breast cancer increases the possibility to grow meningioma. Furthermore, there was no causal relationship between overall breast cancer and breast cancer with different ER status on meningioma by our reverse MR examination.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.