Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31001821›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2019

Trends in frequency and outcome of high-risk breast lesions at core needle biopsy in women recalled at biennial screening mammography, a multiinstitutional study.

Jacky D Luiten, Bram Korte, Adri C Voogd, Willem Vreuls, Ernest J T Luiten, Luc J Strobbe, Matthieu J C M Rutten, Menno L Plaisier, Paul N Lohle, Marianne J H Hooijen and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

12 authors.

Jacky D LuitenDepartment of Surgery, Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7374-2257
Bram KorteDepartment of Radiology, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Adri C VoogdDepartment of Epidemiology, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Research Institute GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Willem VreulsDepartment of Pathology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Ernest J T LuitenDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands.
Luc J StrobbeDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Matthieu J C M RuttenDepartment of Radiology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands.
Menno L PlaisierDepartment of Radiology, Maxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands.
Paul N LohleDepartment of Radiology, Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Marianne J H HooijenDepartment of Radiology, St Anna Hospital, Geldrop, The Netherlands.
Vivianne C G Tjan-HeijnenSchool for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Research Institute GROW, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Lucien E M DuijmDepartment of Radiology, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, we studied the incidence, management and outcome of high-risk breast lesions in a consecutive series of 376,519 screens of women who received biennial screening mammography. During the 6-year period covered by the study, the proportion of women who underwent core needle biopsy (CNB) after recall remained fairly stable, ranging from 39.2% to 48.1% (mean: 44.2%, 5,212/11,783), whereas the proportion of high-risk lesions at CNB (i.e., flat epithelial atypia, atypical ductal hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ and papillary lesions) gradually increased from 3.2% (25/775) in 2011 to 9.5% (86/901) in 2016 (p < 0.001). The mean proportion of high-risk lesions at CNB that were subsequently treated with diagnostic surgical excision was 51.4% (169/329) and varied between 41.0% and 64.3% through the years, but the excision rate for high-risk lesions per 1,000 screens and per 100 recalls increased from 0.25 (2011) to 0.70 (2016; p < 0.001) and from 0.81 (2011) to 2.50 (2016; p < 0.001), respectively. The proportion of all diagnostic surgical excisions showing in situ or invasive breast cancer was 29.0% (49/169) and varied from 22.2% (8/36) in 2014 to 38.5% (5/13) in 2011. In conclusion, the proportion of high-risk lesions at CNB tripled in a 6-year period, with a concomitant increased excision rate for these lesions. As the proportion of surgical excisions showing in situ or invasive breast cancer did not increase, a rising number of screened women underwent invasive surgical excision with benign outcome.

Indexed as

AgedBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleBreastBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMammographyMass ScreeningMastectomyMiddle AgedNetherlandsdiagnosticshigh-risk lesionsmammographic screeningrisk-associated lesionssurgical excision

Identifiers

PMID31001821
PMCPMC6766874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.