Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30681901›Full record

ReviewRadiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc

Calcifications at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Imaging Features and Biopsy Techniques.

Joao V Horvat, Delia M Keating, Halio Rodrigues-Duarte, Elizabeth A Morris, Victoria L Mango

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. In-vitro Detection of Intramammary-like Macrocalcifications Using Susceptibility-weighted MR Imaging Techniques at 1.5T.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. [Mammography-Guided Interventional Procedure].Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joao V HorvatFrom the Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th St, Suite 715, New York, NY 10065.
Delia M KeatingFrom the Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th St, Suite 715, New York, NY 10065.
Halio Rodrigues-DuarteFrom the Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th St, Suite 715, New York, NY 10065.
Elizabeth A MorrisFrom the Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th St, Suite 715, New York, NY 10065.
Victoria L MangoFrom the Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th St, Suite 715, New York, NY 10065.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1844-7965
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Full-field digital mammography (FFDM), the standard of care for breast cancer screening, has some limitations. With the advent of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), improvements including decreased recall rates and increased cancer detection rates have been observed. The quasi-three-dimensional capability of DBT reduces breast tissue overlap, a significant limitation of FFDM. However, early studies demonstrate that a few cancers detected at FFDM may not be diagnosed at DBT-only screening, and lesions with calcifications as the dominant feature may look less suspicious at DBT or not be visible at all. These findings support the use of combined FFDM and DBT protocols to optimize screening performance. However, this combination would approximately double the patient's radiation exposure. The development of computer algorithms that generate two-dimensional synthesized mammography (SM) views from DBT has improved calcification conspicuity and sensitivity. Therefore, SM may substitute for FFDM in screening protocols, reducing radiation exposure. DBT plus SM demonstrates significantly better performance than that of FFDM alone, although there are reports of missed malignant calcifications. Thus, some centers continue to perform FFDM with DBT. Use of DBT in breast imaging has also necessitated the development of DBT-guided biopsy. DBT-guided biopsy may have a higher success rate than that of stereotactic biopsy, with a shorter procedure time. While DBT brings substantial improvements to breast cancer imaging, it is important to be aware of its strengths and limitations regarding detection of calcifications. This article reviews the imaging appearance of breast calcifications at DBT, discusses calcification biopsy techniques, and provides an overview of the current literature. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Indexed as

MammographyBiopsyBreastBreast DiseasesBreast NeoplasmsCalcinosisDiagnosis, DifferentialEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID30681901
PMCPMC6438361
OpenAlexW2911711268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.