Trial reportBreast cancer research and treatment2014
Mammographic screening detects low-risk tumor biology breast cancers.
Trial report in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of Molecular Tools to Identify Patients With Indolent Breast Cancers With Ultralow Risk Over 2 Decades.JAMA oncology · 2017Trial
- Subtype-specific screen-detected and interval breast cancer rates in population screening: a BreastScreen Queensland cohort study.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Article
- Evaluating the impact of histological vs. nuclear grading on CPS + EG Score for HR + /HER2-early breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- Surveillance Outcomes by Imaging Methods in the First 5 Years After Breast Cancer Surgery.Korean journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Risk stratification by ultrasound and mammography for screen-detected non-palpable breast cancer in Chinese women.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Ensemble-based classification using microRNA expression identifies a breast cancer patient subgroup with an ultralow long-term risk of metastases.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Clinicopathological and prognostic value of calcification morphology descriptors in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Insights into imaging · 2023Review
- The COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Retrospective Study.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2022Article
- Breast Cancer Screening: Is There Room for De-escalation?Current breast cancer reports · 2022Review
- Deep Learning Predicts Interval and Screening-detected Cancer from Screening Mammograms: A Case-Case-Control Study in 6369 Women.Radiology · 2021Article
- Combining method of detection and 70-gene signature for enhanced prognostication of breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2021Article
- Personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer: ENVISION consensus statement.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020Review
- Poor Biological Factors and Prognosis of Interval Breast Cancers: Long-Term Results of Bahçeşehir (Istanbul) Breast Cancer Screening Project in Turkey.JCO global oncology · 2020Article
- Interval breast cancers - insights into a complex phenotype.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020Article
- Artificial neural network models to predict nodal status in clinically node-negative breast cancer.BMC cancer · 2019Article
- Primary Care Provider Experience with Breast Density Legislation in Massachusetts.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2018Article
- A breast cancer gene signature for indolent disease.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2017Article
- Article
- Equivalence of MammaPrint array types in clinical trials and diagnostics.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2016Article
- Impact of the Introduction of Digital Mammography in an Organized Screening Program on the Recall and Detection Rate.Journal of digital imaging · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Overdiagnosis of breast cancer, i.e. the detection of slow-growing tumors that would never have caused symptoms or death, became more prevalent with the implementation of population-based screening. Only rough estimates have been made of the proportion of patients that are overdiagnosed and identification of those patients is difficult. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate whether tumor biology can help identify patients with screen-detected tumors at such a low risk of recurrence that they are likely to be overdiagnosed. Furthermore, we wish to evaluate the impact of the transition from film-screen mammography (FSM) to the more sensitive full-field digital mammography (FFDM) on the biology of the tumors detected by each screening-modality. All Dutch breast cancer patients enrolled in the MINDACT trial (EORTC-10041) accrued 2007-2011, who participated in the national screening program (biennial screening ages 50-75) were included (n = 1,165). We calculated the proportions of high-, low- and among those the ultralow-risk tumors according to the 70-gene signature for patients with screen-detected (n = 775) and interval (n = 390) cancers for FSM and FFDM. Screen-detected cancers had significantly more often a low-risk tumor biology (68 %) of which 54 % even an ultralow-risk compared to interval cancers (53 % low-, of which 45 % ultralow-risk (p = 0.001) with an OR of 2.33 (p < 0.0001; 95 % CI 1.73-3.15). FFDM detected significantly more high-risk tumors (35 %) compared to FSM (27 %) (p = 0.011). Aside from favorable clinico-pathological factors, screen-detected cancers were also more likely to have a biologically low-risk or even ultralow-risk tumor. Especially for patients with screen-detected cancers the use of tools, such as the 70-gene signature, to differentiate breast cancers by risk of recurrence may minimize overtreatment. The recent transition in screening-modalities led to an increase in the detection of biologically high-risk cancers using FFDM.
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.