ArticleClinical imaging2020
Assessment of MRI-detected lesions on screening tomosynthesis in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Article in Clinical imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The value of intratumoral and peritumoral ultrasound radiomics model constructed using multiple machine learning algorithms for non-mass breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The features associated with mammography-occult MRI-detected newly diagnosed breast cancer analysed by comparing machine learning models with a logistic regression model.La Radiologia medica · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the presence of screening digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) correlates for suspicious lesions detected on pre-operative staging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.
methodsAfter approval from the institutional review board (IRB), screening DBTs on breast cancer patients with BI-RADS 4 or 5 staging MRI exams between 8/1/17 and 8/1/18 were assessed for presence of DBT correlates for suspicious MRI findings. The pathology of the index lesion, type of additional MRI finding (mass, non-mass enhancement, or focus), correlative finding on tomosynthesis (mass, asymmetry/focal asymmetry, distortion, or calcifications), size on MRI and tomosynthesis, breast density, and pathology of the additional lesion were recorded. The chi-square test of association was used unless otherwise specified. Confidence intervals for proportions were estimated using the Wilson's score method.
results17/70 (24%) of additional lesions seen on pre-operative MRI exams in patients with newly diagnosed cancer had a mammographic correlate on corresponding screening DBT. There was no significant relationship between the presence of a mammographic correlate and the type of MRI finding (mass, NME, or focus), breast density, size of lesion, pathology of index cancer, or pathology of the additional lesion (p≥ 0.05).
conclusions76% of additional lesions seen on pre-operative staging MRI in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer are not seen retrospectively on screening DBT. Since about 24% of MRI-detected additional lesions may have a DBT correlate, DBT exams should be reviewed in patients recalled for further workup of findings seen on pre-operative MRI since this may facilitate DBT-guided biopsy of suspicious lesions, which is preferable to MRI-guided biopsy for cost and patient comfort reasons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.