ArticleEuropean radiology2016
Comparison of the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and magnetic resonance imaging added to digital mammography in women with known breast cancers.
Article in European radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Occult breast cancer in an older woman: A case report.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2025Article
- Digital Breast Tomosynthesis versus MRI as an Adjunct to Full-Field Digital Mammography for Preoperative Evaluation of Breast Cancer according to Mammographic Density.Korean journal of radiology · 2022Article
- Intra- and peri-tumoral radiomics for predicting the sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer based on preoperative mammography and MRI.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Factors associated with mammographic breast density among women in Karachi Pakistan.BMC women's health · 2021Article
- Multireader comparison of contrast-enhanced mammography versus the combination of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in the preoperative assessment of breast cancer.La Radiologia medica · 2021Article
- Diagnostic performance of mammography and magnetic resonance imaging for evaluating mammographically visible breast masses.The Journal of international medical research · 2021Article
- Preoperative breast MR imaging in newly diagnosed breast cancer: Comparison of outcomes based on mammographic modality, breast density and breast parenchymal enhancement.Clinical imaging · 2021Article
- Preoperative Staging in Breast Cancer: Intraindividual Comparison of Unenhanced MRI Combined With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced-MRI.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Radiomic Evaluations of the Diagnostic Performance of DM, DBT, DCE MRI, DWI, and Their Combination for the Diagnosisof Breast Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Assessment of MRI-detected lesions on screening tomosynthesis in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.Clinical imaging · 2020Article
- Mammographic Breast Density Profile of Jordanian Women With Normal and Breast Cancer Findings.Breast cancer : basic and clinical research · 2020Article
- Consensus Meeting of Breast Imaging: BI-RADS® and Beyond.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Surgical Management of Breast Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- The role of breast tomosynthesis in a predominantly dense breast population at a tertiary breast centre: breast density assessment and diagnostic performance in comparison with MRI.European radiology · 2018Article
- Imaging features of breast cancers on digital breast tomosynthesis according to molecular subtype: association with breast cancer detection.The British journal of radiology · 2017Article
- Clinical Breast MR Using MRS or DWI: Who Is the Winner?Frontiers in oncology · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) added to mammography in women with known breast cancers.
methodsThree radiologists independently reviewed image sets of 172 patients with 184 cancers; mammography alone, DBT plus mammography and MRI plus mammography, and scored for cancer probability using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). Jack-knife alternative free-response receiver-operating characteristic (JAFROC), which allows diagnostic performance estimation using single lesion as a statistical unit in a cancer-only population, was used. Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) were compared using the McNemar and Fisher-exact tests.
resultsThe JAFROC figures of merit (FOMs) was lower in DBT plus mammography (0.937) than MRI plus mammography (0.978, P = 0.0006) but higher than mammography alone (0.900, P = 0 .0013). The sensitivity was lower in DBT plus mammography (88.2 %) than MRI plus mammography (97.8 %) but higher than mammography alone (78.3 %, both P < 0 .0001). The PPV was significantly higher in DBT plus mammography (93.3 %) than MRI plus mammography (89.6 %, P = 0 .0282).
conclusionsDBT provided lower diagnostic performance than MRI as an adjunctive imaging to mammography. However, DBT had higher diagnostic performance than mammography and higher PPV than MRI. KEY POINTS: • Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) plus mammography was compared with MRI plus mammography. • DBT had lower sensitivity and higher PPV than MRI. • DBT had higher diagnostic performance than mammography.
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.