Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30670066›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2019

Localized mammographic density is associated with interval cancer and large breast cancer: a nested case-control study.

Fredrik Strand, Edward Azavedo, Roxanna Hellgren, Keith Humphreys, Mikael Eriksson, John Shepherd, Per Hall, Kamila Czene

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05021055 (Multicentric Study for External Validation of a Deep Learning Model for Mammographic Breast Density Categorization), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05021055 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Multicentric Study for External Validation of a Deep Learning Model for Mammographic Breast Density Categorization

TypeobservationalSponsorHospital Italiano de Buenos AiresRan2021 to 2022Enrolled277ConditionsBreast Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Fredrik StrandDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Nobels Väg 12A, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. fredrik.strand@ki.se.ORCID 0000-0003-3910-7086
Edward AzavedoDepartment of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Roxanna HellgrenDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Nobels Väg 12A, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Keith HumphreysDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Nobels Väg 12A, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mikael ErikssonDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Nobels Väg 12A, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
John ShepherdUniversity of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, USA.
Per HallDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Nobels Väg 12A, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kamila CzeneDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Nobels Väg 12A, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh mammographic density is associated with breast cancer and with delayed detection. We have examined whether localized density, at the site of the subsequent cancer, is independently associated with being diagnosed with a large-sized or interval breast cancer.

methodsWithin a prospective cohort of 63,130 women, we examined 891 women who were diagnosed with incident breast cancer. For 386 women, retrospective localized density assessment was possible. The main outcomes were interval cancer vs. screen-detected cancer and large (> 2 cm) vs. small cancer. In negative screening mammograms, overall and localized density were classified reflecting the BI-RADS standard. Density concordance probabilities were estimated through multinomial regression. The associations between localized density and the two outcomes were modeled through logistic regression, adjusted for overall density, age, body mass index, and other characteristics.

resultsThe probabilities of concordant localized density were 0.35, 0.60, 0.38, and 0.32 for overall categories "A," "B," "C," and "D." Overall density was associated with large cancer, comparing density category D to A with OR 4.6 (95%CI 1.8-11.6) and with interval cancer OR 31.5 (95%CI 10.9-92) among all women. Localized density was associated with large cancer at diagnosis with OR 11.8 (95%CI 2.7-51.8) among all women and associated with first-year interval cancer with OR 6.4 (0.7 to 58.7) with a significant linear trend p = 0.027.

conclusionsOverall density often misrepresents localized density at the site where cancer subsequently arises. High localized density is associated with interval cancer and with large cancer. Our findings support the continued effort to develop and examine computer-based measures of localized density for use in personalized breast cancer screening.

Indexed as

Breast DensityBreastBreast NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesDelayed DiagnosisEarly Detection of CancerFalse Negative ReactionsFemaleHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMammographyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsBreast cancerEarly detectionMammographic densityMammographyScreening

Identifiers

PMID30670066
PMCPMC6341532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.