Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34156554›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2022

Mammographic features of benign breast lesions and risk of subsequent breast cancer in women attending breast cancer screening.

Margarita Posso, Rodrigo Alcántara, Ivonne Vázquez, Laura Comerma, Marisa Baré, Javier Louro, M Jesús Quintana, Marta Román, Rafael Marcos-Gragera, María Vernet-Tomas and 7 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Understanding Benign Breast Disease and Subsequent Breast Cancer in Hispanic White Females: A Step Closer to Evidence-Based Management.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

17 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Margarita PossoDepartment of Epidemiology and Evaluation, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain.
Rodrigo AlcántaraDepartment of Radiology, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Ivonne VázquezPathology Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Laura ComermaPathology Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain.
Marisa BaréResearch Network on Health Services in Chronic Diseases (REDISSEC), Barcelona, Spain.
Javier LouroDepartment of Epidemiology and Evaluation, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain.
M Jesús QuintanaDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, University Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, IIB Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain.
Marta RománDepartment of Epidemiology and Evaluation, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain.
Rafael Marcos-GrageraCIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain.
María Vernet-TomasDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain.
Francina SaladieEpidemiology and Cancer Prevention Service, Hospital Universitari Sant Joan de Reus, IISPV, Reus, Spain.
Carmen VidalCancer Prevention and Control Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain.
Xavier BargallóDepartment of Radiology, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, Spain.
Lupe PeñalvaVallés Oriental Breast Cancer Early Detection Program, Barcelona, Spain.
María SalaDepartment of Epidemiology and Evaluation, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain.
Xavier CastellsDepartment of Epidemiology and Evaluation, IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), Barcelona, Spain. xcastells@parcdesalutmar.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2528-0382
BELE study group
Spanish Clinical Research Network · ESHospital Del Mar · ESParc de Salut · ESGeneralitat de Catalunya · ESHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESHospital de Sant Pau · ESInstitut Català d'Oncologia · ESInstitut de Recerca Biomèdica Catalunya Sud · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ES

Funding

Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI17/00047Instituto de Salud Carlos III RD12/0001/0015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the mammographic features in women with benign breast disease (BBD) and the risk of subsequent breast cancer according to their mammographic findings.

methodsWe analyzed data from a Spanish cohort of women screened from 1995 to 2015 and followed up until December 2017 (median follow-up, 5.9 years). We included 10,650 women who had both histologically confirmed BBD and mammographic findings. We evaluated proliferative and nonproliferative BBD subtypes, and their mammographic features: architectural distortion, asymmetries, calcifications, masses, and multiple findings. The adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for breast cancer were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model. We plotted the adjusted cumulative incidence curves.

resultsCalcifications were more frequent in proliferative disease with atypia (43.9%) than without atypia (36.8%) or nonproliferative disease (22.2%; p value < 0.05). Masses were more frequent in nonproliferative lesions (59.1%) than in proliferative lesions without atypia (35.1%) or with atypia (30.0%; p value < 0.05). Multiple findings and architectural distortion were more likely in proliferative disease (16.1% and 4.7%) than in nonproliferative disease (12.8% and 1.9%). Subsequent breast cancer occurred in 268 (2.5%) women. Compared with women who had masses, the highest risk of subsequent breast cancer was found in those with architectural distortions (aHR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.16-4.22), followed by those with multiple findings (aHR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.34-2.66), asymmetries (aHR, 1.66; 95% CI, 0.84-3.28), and calcifications (aHR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.21-2.12).

conclusionBBD subtypes showed distinct mammographic findings. The risk of subsequent breast cancer was high in those who have shown architectural distortion, multiple findings, asymmetries, and calcifications than in women with masses. KEY POINTS: • The presence of mammographic findings in women attending breast cancer screening helps clinicians to assess women with benign breast disease (BBD). • Calcifications were frequent in BBDs with atypia, which are the ones with a high breast cancer risk, while masses were common in low-risk BBDs. • The excess risk of subsequent breast cancer in women with BBD was higher in those who showed architectural distortion compared to those with masses.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFibrocystic Breast DiseaseBreastCohort StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyRisk FactorsBreast diseasesBreast neoplasmsLongitudinal studiesMammographyMass screening

Identifiers

PMID34156554
OpenAlexW3174574517

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.