ReviewInsights into imaging2020
Do we still need breast cancer screening in the era of targeted therapies and precision medicine?
Review in Insights into imaging, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- ESR Essentials: screening for breast cancer - general recommendations by EUSOBI.European radiology · 2024Guideline
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in women with triple-negative breast cancer: real world results from Western Kenya.The oncologist · 2026Article
- Perceived inequalities and cultural inclusivity in UK Breast Cancer Information and Care: a mixed method study.JPRAS open · 2026Article
- European Cancer Prevention Organization on cancer screening: an expert panel position paper.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- Temporal changes in breast cancer lifetime risk and implications for personalised surveillance in high-risk women.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Contrast-enhanced mammography in the preoperative assessment of primary operable breast cancer: Results from a prospective, two-centre study.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Association Between Coffee and Caffeine Intake and Risk of Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies.Health science reports · 2026Review
- RNAscope-based HER2 mRNA detection shows high concordance with fluorescenceTranslational cancer research · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for breast cancer prevention: the vision ahead.European radiology · 2026Review
- Contrast-Enhanced Mammography-Guided Biopsy in Patients with Extensive Suspicious Microcalcifications.Cancers · 2025Article
- Article
- Neutrophils as key regulators of tumor microenvironment in breast cancer: a focus on N1 and N2 polarization.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Nomogram Development for Assessing Oncotype DX Recurrence Scores in Breast Cancer: A Chinese Population Study.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Multifaceted barriers associated with clinical breast examination in sub-Saharan Africa: A multilevel analytical approach.PloS one · 2025Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: A Literature Review of Clinical Uses for Cancer Diagnosis and Surgical Oncology.Cancers · 2024Review
- DAB2IP loss in luminal a breast cancer leads to NF-κB-associated aggressive oncogenic phenotypes.JCI insight · 2024Article
- CircGSK3β mediates PD-L1 transcription through miR-338-3p/PRMT5/H3K4me3 to promote breast cancer cell immune evasion and tumor progression.Cell death discovery · 2024Article
- Nanoparticle-mediated diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of breast cancer.Nanoscale advances · 2024Review
- The paradox of MRI for breast cancer screening: high-risk and dense breasts-available evidence and current practice.Insights into imaging · 2024Review
- Detection and quantification of breast arterial calcifications on mammograms: a deep learning approach.European radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) is the most common female cancer and the second cause of death among women worldwide. The 5-year relative survival rate recently improved up to 90% due to increased population coverage and women's attendance to organised mammography screening as well as to advances in therapies, especially systemic treatments. Screening attendance is associated with a mortality reduction of at least 30% and a 40% lower risk of advanced disease. The stage at diagnosis remains the strongest predictor of recurrences. Systemic treatments evolved dramatically over the last 20 years: aromatase inhibitors improved the treatment of early-stage luminal BC; targeted monoclonal antibodies changed the natural history of anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2) disease; immunotherapy is currently investigated in patients with triple-negative BC; gene expression profiling is now used with the aim of personalising systemic treatments. In the era of precision medicine, it is a challenging task to define the relative contribution of early diagnosis by screening mammography and systemic treatments in determining BC survival. Estimated contributions before 2000 were 46% for screening and 54% for treatment advances and after 2000, 37% and 63%, respectively. A model showed that the 10-year recurrence rate would be 30% and 25% using respectively chemotherapy or novel treatments in the absence of screening, but would drop to 19% and 15% respectively if associated with mammography screening. Early detection per se has not a curative intent and systemic treatment has limited benefit on advanced stages. Both screening mammography and systemic therapies continue to positively contribute to BC prognosis.
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.