Cited by 108Phytoestrogen effects and researchNutritional Studies and DietCancer Risks and Factors

Post-diagnosis soy food intake and breast cancer survival: A meta-analysis of cohort studies

Open access
Chi, Feng, Wu, Rong, Zeng, Yue-Can, Xing, Rui, Liu, Yang, Xu, Zhao-Guo·2013·Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Data on associations between soy food intake after cancer diagnosis with breast cancer survival are conflicting, so we conducted this meta-analysis for more accurate evaluation. METHODS: Comprehensive searches were conducted to find cohort studies of the relationship between soy food intake after cancer diagnosis and breast cancer survival. Data were analyzed with comprehensive meta-analysis software. RESULTS: Five cohort studies (11,206 patients) were included. Pooling all comparisons, soy food intake after diagnosis was associated with reduced mortality (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.77 0.93) and recurrence (HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.72 0.87). Pooling the comparisons of highest vs. lowest dose, soy food intake after diagnosis was again associated with reduced mortality (HR 0.84, 95%CI 0.71 0.99) and recurrence (HR 0.74, 95%CI 0.64 0.85). Subgroup analysis of ER status showed that soy food intake was associated with reduced mortality in both ER negative (highest vs. lowest: HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.64 0.88) and ER positive patients (highest vs. lowest: HR 0.72, 95%CI 0.61 0.84), and both premenopausal (highest vs. lowest: HR 0.78, 95%CI 0.69 0.88) and postmenopausal patients (highest vs. lowest: HR 0.81, 95%CI 0.73 0.91). In additioin, soy food intake was associated with reduced recurrence in ER negative (highest vs. lowest: HR 0.64, 95%CI 0.44 0.94) and ER+/PR+ (highest vs. lowest: HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.49 0.86), and postmenopausal patients (highest vs. lowest: HR 0.67, 95%CI 0.56 0.80). CONCLUSION: Our meta- analysis showed that soy food intake might be associated with better survival, especially for ER negative, ER+/ PR+, and postmenopausal patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.4.2407

Cites

35 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chi, F., Wu, R., Zeng, Y.-C., Xing, R., Liu, Y., & Xu, Z.-G.
Affiliations
Sheng Jing Hospital (CN)
Venue
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
Published
2013-04-30
Volume
14
Issue
4
Pages
2407-2412
ISSN
1513-7368 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2160002407
Cited by
108
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Phytoestrogen effects and research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Risks and Factors
Keywords
breast cancer survival, breast cancer recurrence, breast cancer mortality, estrogen receptor status, progesterone receptor status, menopausal status
MeSH terms
Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Prognosis, Cohort Studies, Survival Rate, Soy Foods

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review