Evidence Hub

Pregnancy-Associated Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

B. Walters, India Midwinter, C. Chew-Graham, Kelvin P. Jordan, Garima Sharma, L. Chappell, E. Crosbie, Purvi J. Parwani et al.

Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes, 2024

34 citations

Abstract

This study aimed to systematically evaluate and quantify the risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in patients with pregnancy-associated cancer (PAC). This study was conducted from February 13, 2021, through July 24, 2023. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted to identify studies reporting outcomes for patients with PAC. The study was registered on PROSPERO. Two reviewers independently conducted screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. The associations were quantified using random-effects meta-analysis. The initial search produced 29,401 titles and abstracts, after which 147 unique full-text articles were screened, of which 22 articles with 59,190 pregnancies with PAC from 70,097,167 births were included in the meta-analysis. Women with PAC were at significantly increased risk of cesarean deliveries (risk ratio [RR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.31-1.89), preterm birth (RR, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.37-3.98), venous thromboembolism (RR, 6.76; 95% CI, 5.08-8.99), and maternal death (RR, 41.58; 95% CI, 20.38-84.83). The only outcome with reduced risk was instrumental mode of delivery (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87). Pregnancy-associated cancer increases risk of adverse outcomes, including a 7-fold risk of venous thromboembolism and a 42-fold risk of maternal death. Further research is required to better understand the mechanisms leading to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free