ArticleAJR. American journal of roentgenology2015
Breast Cancer Characteristics Associated With Digital Versus Film-Screen Mammography for Screen-Detected and Interval Cancers.
Article in AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of Full-Field Digital Mammography Versus Film-Screen Mammography in Population Screening: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Pooled it
- Performance of Statistical and Machine Learning Risk Prediction Models for Advanced Breast Cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Performance of breast cancer risk prediction algorithms across mammography systems in the UK screening programme.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Incidence and Risk Factors of Interval and Screen-Detected Breast Cancer.JAMA oncology · 2025Article
- Current Strategies to Reducing Interval Breast Cancers: A Systematic Review.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2025Review
- Risk Factors and Mortality Among Women With Interval Breast Cancer vs Screen-Detected Breast Cancer.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Population simulation modeling of disparities in US breast cancer mortality.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2023Article
- Impact of BMI on Prevalence of Dense Breasts by Race and Ethnicity.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Cumulative Advanced Breast Cancer Risk Prediction Model Developed in a Screening Mammography Population.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2022Article
- A case-case analysis of women with breast cancer: predictors of interval vs screen-detected cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- Diet-Driven Inflammation and Insulinemia and Risk of Interval Breast Cancer.Nutrition and cancer · 2022Article
- RE: Advanced Breast Cancer Definitions by Staging System Examined in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2021Article
- Comparison of Mortality Among Participants of Women's Health Initiative Trials With Screening-Detected Breast Cancers vs Interval Breast Cancers.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Interval breast cancers - insights into a complex phenotype.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020Article
- Double reading in breast cancer screening: considerations for policy-making.The British journal of radiology · 2020Review
- Breast Cancer With a Poor Prognosis Diagnosed After Screening Mammography With Negative Results.JAMA oncology · 2018Article
- PAM50 and Risk of Recurrence Scores for Interval Breast Cancers.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2018Article
- Risk Factors That Increase Risk of Estrogen Receptor-Positive and -Negative Breast Cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2017Article
- Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography.European radiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to determine whether pathologic findings of screen-detected and interval cancers differ for digital versus film mammography. MATERIALS AND
methodsBreast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data from 2003-2011 on 3,021,515 screening mammograms (40.3% digital, 59.7% film) of women 40-89 years old were reviewed. Cancers were considered screen detected if diagnosed within 12 months of an examination with positive findings and interval if diagnosed within 12 months of an examination with negative findings. Tumor characteristics for screen-detected and interval cancers were compared for digital versus film mammography by use of logistic regression models to estimate the odds ratio and 95% CI with adjustment for age, race and ethnicity, hormone therapy use, screening interval, examination year, and registry. Generalized estimating equations were used to account for correlation within facilities.
resultsAmong 15,729 breast cancers, 85.3% were screen detected and 14.7% were interval. Digital and film mammography had similar rates of screen-detected (4.47 vs 4.42 per 1000 examinations) and interval (0.73 vs 0.79 per 1000 examinations) cancers for digital versus film. In adjusted analyses, interval cancers diagnosed after digital examinations with negative findings were less likely to be American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIB or higher (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.93), have positive nodal status (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.95), or be estrogen receptor negative (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.91) than were interval cancers diagnosed after a film examination with negative findings.
conclusionScreen-detected cancers diagnosed after digital and film mammography had similar rates of unfavorable tumor characteristics. Interval-detected cancers diagnosed after a digital examination were less likely to have unfavorable tumor features than those diagnosed after film mammography, but the absolute differences were small.
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.