ArticleEuropean radiology2017
Digital mammography screening: sensitivity of the programme dependent on breast density.
Article in European radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Extending the Age Range in Mammography Screening: A Benefit-Risk Assessment from a Radiation Protection Perspective.RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin · 2026Pooled it
- Radiation exposure and screening yield by digital breast tomosynthesis compared to mammography: results of the TOSYMA Trial breast density related.European radiology · 2025Trial
- A comparison of tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers and their relationship with breast density and AJCC prognostic stage in a UK screening cohort.European radiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Supplemental Breast Ultrasound in Mammography Screening for Women with Critically Dense Breasts.Cancers · 2026Article
- Breast Imaging Findings in Women with Lipedema: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Breast MRI to Screen Women With Extremely Dense Breasts.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Review
- Review
- Subgroups varying in risk and density highlight the potential for stratified breast cancer screening.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2025Article
- Our journey toward implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer screening: the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Project.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025Article
- The verification of the utility of a commercially available phantom combination for quality control in contrast-enhanced mammography.Physical and engineering sciences in medicine · 2024Article
- Discovery of Plasma Lipids as Potential Biomarkers Distinguishing Breast Cancer Patients from Healthy Controls.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Risk stratification in breast screening workshop.BMC proceedings · 2024Article
- Assessment of the Breast Density Prevalence in Swiss Women with a Deep Convolutional Neural Network: A Cross-Sectional Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Clinical Significance of Combined Density and Deep-Learning-Based Texture Analysis for Stratifying the Risk of Short-Term and Long-Term Breast Cancer in Screening.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Improvement of Breast Cancer Detection Using Dual-Layer Spectral CT.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Dense breasts at breast cancer screening: can DWI-based breast MRI without contrast help us in the pursuit of personalized screening?European radiology · 2024Article
- Improving mammography interpretation for both novice and experienced readers: a comparative study of two commercial artificial intelligence software.European radiology · 2024Article
- Triple assessment breast clinics: The value of clinical core biopsies.Irish journal of medical science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo analyse the impact of breast density on the sensitivity of a population-based digital mammography screening programme (SP) as key evaluation parameter.
methods25,576 examinations were prospectively stratified from ACR category 1 to 4 for increments of 25 % density during independent double reading. SP was calculated as number of screen-detected cancers divided by the sum of screen-detected plus interval cancers (24-months period) per ACR category, related to the first reading (a), second reading (b) and highest stratification if discrepant (c). Chi-square tests were used for comparison.
resultsOverall sensitivity of the programme was 79.9 %. SP in ACR 4 (a: 50 %, b: 50 %, c: 50 %) was significantly lower than in ACR 3 (a: 72.9 %, b: 79.4 %, c: 80.7 %, p < 0.001), ACR 2 (a: 83.9 %, b: 85.7 %, c: 83.2 %, p < 0.001) and ACR 1 (a: 100 %, b: 88.8 %, c: 100 %; p < 0.001). Frequencies of ACR 4 were a: 5.0 %, b: 4.3 %, c: 6.9 %.
conclusionDigital mammography screening with independent double reading leads to a high overall SP. In the small group of women with breast density classified as ACR 4 SP is significantly reduced compared to all other ACR categories. KEY POINTS: • Overall sensitivity of a population-based digital mammography screening programme (SP) was 79.9 %. • In women with ACR 1, 2, or 3, SP ranged between 72.9 %-100 %. • ACR 4 was rare in participants (<7 %) and SP was only 50 %. • SP in ACR 4 differed significantly from ACR 3 (p < 0.001).
Indexed as
Identifiers
27822617What 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.