Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31538141›Full record

ReviewJournal of breast imaging2019

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Current Concepts in Biology, Imaging, and Treatment.

Mariam Shehata, Lars Grimm, Nancy Ballantyne, Ana Lourenco, Linda R Demello, Mark R Kilgore, Habib Rahbar

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of breast imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Imaging of Noncalcified Ductal CarcinomaJournal of clinical imaging science · 2021
    Article
  20. Abbreviated MR Imaging for Breast Cancer.Radiologic clinics of North America · 2021
    Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mariam ShehataUniversity of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Seattle, WA.
Lars GrimmDuke University Medical School, Department of Radiology, Durham, NC.ORCID 0000-0002-3865-3352
Nancy BallantyneDuke University Medical School, Department of Radiology, Durham, NC.
Ana LourencoBrown University Medical School, Department of Radiology, Providence, RI.ORCID 0000-0001-8652-1007
Linda R DemelloBrown University Medical School, Department of Radiology, Providence, RI.
Mark R KilgoreUniversity of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Anatomic Pathology, Seattle, WA.
Habib RahbarUniversity of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Seattle, WA.ORCID 0000-0003-4835-1478
Brown University · USDuke University · USSeattle Cancer Care Alliance · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

MRI Characterization of Biological Risk of Ductal Carcinoma in SituR01CA203883 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI RAHBAR, HABIBOLLAH · 2017 to 2021
$1.8M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA203883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a group of heterogeneous epithelial proliferations confined to the milk ducts that nearly always present in asymptomatic women on breast cancer screening. A stage 0, preinvasive breast cancer, increased detection of DCIS was initially hailed as a means to prevent invasive breast cancer through surgical treatment with adjuvant radiation and/or endocrine therapies. However, controversy in the medical community has emerged in the past two decades that a fraction of DCIS represents overdiagnosis, leading to unnecessary treatments and resulting morbidity. The imaging hallmarks of DCIS include linearly or segmentally distributed calcifications on mammography or nonmass enhancement on breast MRI. Imaging features have been shown to reflect the biological heterogeneity of DCIS lesions, with recent studies indicating MRI may identify a greater fraction of higher-grade lesions than mammography does. There is strong interest in the surgical, imaging, and oncology communities to better align DCIS management with biology, which has resulted in trials of active surveillance and therapy that is less aggressive. However, risk stratification of DCIS remains imperfect, which has limited the development of precision therapy approaches matched to DCIS aggressiveness. Accordingly, there are opportunities for breast imaging radiologists to assist the oncology community by leveraging advanced imaging techniques to identify appropriate patients for the less aggressive DCIS treatments.

Indexed as

active surveillancebreast imagingDCISductal carcinoma in situoverdiagnosisovertreatment

Identifiers

PMID31538141
PMCPMC6735611
OpenAlexW2967695680

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.