ArticleRadiological physics and technology2020
Can digital breast tomosynthesis improve identification of malignant calcifications?
Article in Radiological physics and technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is an emerging imaging tool for both the screening and diagnosis of breast cancers. However, the use of DBT in diagnosis of calcifications remains ambiguous. In this study, we investigated DBT findings that might help differentiate between benign and malignant calcifications. We enrolled 256 subjects and evaluated 303 breasts with grouped or segmental calcifications. All imaging examinations were performed using two-directional full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and DBT. We divided subjects into two groups, namely, "dense" and "fatty," based on the quantity of breast tissue and evaluated whether the growth of cancer causes increased the density overlapping with calcifications. Increased overlapping density was significantly associated with malignant calcifications (p < 0.001), and the identification of increased density was more accurate using DBT than using FFDM. Furthermore, we used DBT to evaluate whether segmental calcifications were continuous or discontinuous. Significantly more malignant than benign calcifications were associated with a continuous distribution (p = 0.035). Increased density overlapping with grouped calcifications was significantly associated with invasive cancers (p = 0.017). The findings of this study suggest that DBT improves the ability to differentiate between benign and malignant calcifications.
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.