Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31399056›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2019

Investigating the feasibility of stratified breast cancer screening using a masking risk predictor.

Olivier Alonzo-Proulx, James G Mainprize, Jennifer A Harvey, Martin J Yaffe

Open access · goldAbstract 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. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Multiclass Segmentation of Suspicious Findings in Simulated Breast Tomosynthesis Images Using a U-Net.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2022
    Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Olivier Alonzo-ProulxPhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5, Canada. oliviera@sri.utoronto.ca.
James G MainprizePhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Jennifer A HarveyDepartment of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Martin J YaffePhysical Sciences, Sunnybrook Research Institute, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5, Canada.
Sunnybrook Research InstituteSunnybrook Health Science Centre · CAUniversity of Virginia Health System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen with dense breasts face a double risk for breast cancer; they are at a higher risk for development of breast cancer than those with less dense breasts, and there is a greater chance that mammography will miss detection of a cancer in dense breasts due to the masking effect of surrounding fibroglandular tissue. These women may be candidates for supplemental screening. In this study, a masking risk model that was previously developed is tested on a cohort of cancer-free women to assess potential efficiency of stratification.

methodsThree masking risk models based on (1) BI-RADS density, (2) volumetric breast density (VBD), and (3) a combination of VBD and detectability were applied to stratify the mammograms of 1897 cancer-free women. The fraction of cancer-free women whose mammograms were deemed by the algorithm to be masked and who would be considered for supplemental imaging was computed as was the corresponding fraction in a screened population of interval (masked) cancers that would be potentially detected by supplemental imaging.

resultsOf the models tested, the combined VBD/detectability model offered the highest efficiency for stratification to supplemental imaging. It predicted that 725 supplemental screens would be performed per interval cancer potentially detected, at an operating point that allowed detection of 64% of the interval cancers. In comparison, stratification based on the upper two BI-RADS density categories required 1117 supplemental screenings per interval cancer detected to capture 64% of interval cancers.

conclusionThe combined VBD/detectability models perform better than BI-RADS and offer a continuum of operating points, suggesting that this model may be effective in guiding a stratified screening environment.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsBreast DensityBreast NeoplasmsDisease SusceptibilityEarly Detection of CancerFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOdds RatioRisk AssessmentBreast densityDetectabilityInterval cancersMaskingStratified screening

Identifiers

PMID31399056
PMCPMC6688203
OpenAlexW2968311158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.