ArticleBritish journal of cancer2013
Trends in breast biopsies for abnormalities detected at screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Histopathological Analysis of Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy in Relation to Microcalcification Findings on Mammography: A Pictorial Review.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- A Machine Learning Ensemble Based on Radiomics to Predict BI-RADS Category and Reduce the Biopsy Rate of Ultrasound-Detected Suspicious Breast Masses.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Ultrasound-Guided Core Biopsy of Breast Lesions in a Resource Limited Setting: Initial Experience of a Multidisciplinary Team.European journal of breast health · 2020Article
- An update on the management of breast atypical ductal hyperplasia.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
- Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging.Insights into imaging · 2020Article
- The emerging role of contrast-enhanced mammography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiagnostic surgical breast biopsies have several disadvantages, therefore, they should be used with hesitation. We determined time trends in types of breast biopsies for the workup of abnormalities detected at screening mammography. We also examined diagnostic delays.
methodsIn a Dutch breast cancer screening region 6230 women were referred for an abnormal screening mammogram between 1 January 1997 and 1 January 2011. During two year follow-up clinical data, breast imaging-, biopsy-, surgery- and pathology-reports were collected of these women. Furthermore, breast cancers diagnosed >3 months after referral (delays) were examined, this included review of mammograms and pathology specimens to determine the cause of the delays.
resultsIn 41.1% (1997-1998) and in 44.8% (2009-2010) of referred women imaging was sufficient for making the diagnosis (P<0.0001). Fine-needle aspiration cytology decreased from 12.7% (1997-1998) to 4.7% (2009-2010) (P<0.0001), percutaneous core-needle biopsies (CBs) increased from 8.0 to 49.1% (P<0.0001) and surgical biopsies decreased from 37.8 to 1.4% (P<0.0001). Delays in breast cancer diagnosis decreased from 6.7 to 1.8% (P=0.003).
conclusionThe use of diagnostic surgical breast biopsies has decreased substantially. They have mostly been replaced by percutaneous CBs and this replacement did not result in an increase of diagnostic delays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.