ArticleEuropean radiology2015
DCE-MRI of the breast in a stand-alone setting outside a complementary strategy - results of the TK-study.
Article in European radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic evaluation of breast MRI in screening - a systematic review and basic approach to cost-effectiveness analyses.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Ultrafast Breast MRI: A Narrative Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Optimizing ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI scan duration in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of MR-mammography as a solitary imaging technique in women with dense breasts: an economic evaluation of the prospective TK-Study.European radiology · 2021Article
- Perirenal Edema as a potential hint towards primary hypertension-Preliminary findings in MRI breast cancer staging.European journal of radiology open · 2016Review
- Article
- The value of "constant sharpness" as a diagnostic sign in MR-Mammography.European journal of radiology open · 2016Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the accuracy of MRI of the breast (DCE-MRI) in a stand-alone setting with extended indications. MATERIALS AND
methodsAccording to the inclusion criteria, breast specialists were invited to refer patients to our institution for DCE-MRI. Depending on the MR findings, patients received either a follow-up or biopsy. Between 04/2006 and 12/2011 a consecutive total of 1,488 women were prospectively examined.
resultsOf 1,488 included patients, 393 patients were lost to follow-up, 1,095 patients were evaluated. 124 patients were diagnosed with malignancy by DCE-MRI (76 TP, 48 FP, 971 TN, 0 FN cases). Positive cases were confirmed by histology, negative cases by MR follow-ups or patient questionnaires over the next 5 years in 1,737 cases (sensitivity 100 %; specificity 95.2 %; PPV 61.3 %; NPV 100 %; accuracy 95.5 %). For invasive cancers only (DCIS excluded), the results were 63 TP; 27 FP; 971 TP and 0 FN (sensitivity 100 %; specificity 97.2 %; PPV 70 %; NPV 100 %; accuracy 97.5 %).
conclusionThe DCE-MRI indications tested imply that negative results in DCE-MRI reliably exclude cancer. The results were achieved in a stand-alone setting (single modality diagnosis). However, these results are strongly dependent on reader experience and adequate technical standards as prerequisites for optimal diagnoses. KEY POINTS: • DCE-MRI of the breast has a high accuracy in finding breast cancer. • The set of indications for DCE-MRI of the breast is still very limited. • DCE-MRI can achieve a high accuracy in a 'screening-like' setting. • Accuracy of breast DCE-MRI is strongly dependent on technique and reader experience. • A negative DCE-MRI effectively excludes cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25577524What 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.