ReviewDer Radiologe2021
[High-risk screening using magnetic resonance imaging].
Review in Der Radiologe, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breast cancer prevention in patients with gBRCA-mutated ovarian cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Associations between Pathogenic Germline Variants in BRCA and Non-Breast/Non-Ovarian Cancer Types in the German Population.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2026Article
- Quality of care before and after initial certification at a German certified hereditary breast and ovarian cancer center.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Primary Prevention and Early Detection of Hereditary Breast Cancer.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Service in Sparsely Populated Western Pomerania.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpecialized breast cancer early detection programs with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in high-risk patients are by now well established in several countries. In Germany, such a program has been running as part of routine care since 2005.
objectivesThis review article will summarize current developments in high-risk screening with MRI. MATERIALS AND
methodsExperiences with the high-risk screening program in Germany over now more than 10 years as well as a review of the current literature will form the basis for this article.
resultsThe MRI of the breast is by far the most sensitive imaging modality for the detection of breast cancer and represents the back bone of high-risk screening. More than 90% of cancers detected at high-risk screening are visible on the MRI and more than 30% of cancers are detected primarily by MRI alone. However, a prerequisite for effective screening with MRI is a sufficiently high breast cancer incidence in the screened population. This is demonstrated by the fact that the positive predictive value of screening with MRI in women without a BRCA1/2 mutation in the age group between 30 and 39 years is unacceptably low with 2.9%.
conclusionsIn high-risk screening, MRI is the primary imaging tool with mammography and/or ultrasound added as adjunct if necessary. In women with a strong family history of breast cancer but no proven pathogenic mutation in one of the known risk genes in the index patient in the family, the high-risk screening should not routinely start at age 30, but should be postponed until the 10-year breast cancer risk passes a threshold of 5%.
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.