ReviewCancers2018
Screening BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers for Breast Cancer.
Review in Cancers, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Imaging Modalities for Breast Cancer Surveillance AmongFrontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Germline Mutations Related to Complete Remission After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Triple-negative Breast Cancer.Journal of breast cancer · 2026Article
- ESR Essentials: post-treatment breast cancer surveillance from mammography to a more personalised approach-practice recommendations by the European Society of Breast Imaging.European radiology · 2026Review
- Genetic risk and clinical implications of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Turkish triple-negative breast cancer patients.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Clinical breast exam contribution to breast cancer diagnosis in BRCA mutation carriers vs. average to intermediate risk women.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
- Primary Prevention and Early Detection of Hereditary Breast Cancer.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Specialty Care and Counselling about Hereditary Cancer Risk Improves Adherence to Cancer Screening and Prevention in Newfoundland and Labrador Patients withCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Defining features of hereditary lobular breast cancer due to CDH1 with magnetic resonance imaging and tumor characteristics.NPJ breast cancer · 2023Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography in the Evaluation of Breast Microcalcifications: Controversies and Diagnostic Management.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Psychological factors and the uptake of preventative measures in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers: results of a prospective cohort study.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Federated Learning-Based Detection of Invasive Carcinoma of No Special Type with Histopathological Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Genetic Counseling, Screening and Risk-Reducing Surgery in Patients with Primary Breast Cancer and Germline BRCA Mutations: Unmet Needs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.European journal of breast health · 2022Article
- Prevalence and Factors Associated with BRCA1/2 Gene Mutation in Chinese Populations with Breast Cancer.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- The Role of Imaging in Health Screening: Screening for Specific Conditions.Academic radiology · 2021Review
- [High-risk screening using magnetic resonance imaging].Der Radiologe · 2021Review
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Screening of Breast Cancer.Radiologic clinics of North America · 2021Review
- Trends in screening breast magnetic resonance imaging use among US women, 2006 to 2016.Cancer · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Women with BRCA mutations, who choose to decline or defer risk-reducing mastectomy, require a highly sensitive breast screening regimen they can begin by age 25 or 30. Meta-analysis of multiple observational studies, in which both mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were performed annually, demonstrated a combined sensitivity of 94% for MRI plus mammography compared to 39% for mammography alone. There was negligible benefit from adding screening ultrasound or clinical breast examination to the other two modalities. The great majority of cancers detected were non-invasive or stage I. While the addition of MRI to mammography lowered the specificity from 95% to 77%, the specificity improved significantly after the first round of screening. The median follow-up of women with screen-detected breast cancer in the above observational studies now exceeds 10 years, and the long-term breast cancer-free survival in most of these studies is 90% to 95%. However, ongoing follow-up of these study patients, as well of women screened and treated more recently, is necessary. Advances in imaging technology will make highly sensitive screening accessible to a greater number of high-risk women.
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.