ArticleCancer biology & medicine2021
Development and evaluation of the screening performance of a low-cost high-risk screening strategy for breast cancer.
Article in Cancer biology & medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Calcification-associated molecular traits and therapeutic strategies in hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer.Cancer biology & medicine · 2024Article
- Effects of joint screening for prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer - results from a controlled trial.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of a population-based breast cancer screening in North China.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Comparisons of clinical characteristics, prognosis, epidemiological factors, and genetic susceptibility between HER2-low and HER2-zero breast cancer among Chinese females.Cancer medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and evaluate the screening performance of a low-cost high-risk screening strategy for breast cancer in low resource areas.
methodsBased on the Multi-modality Independent Screening Trial, 6 questionnaire-based risk factors of breast cancer (age at menarche, age at menopause, age at first live birth, oral contraceptive, obesity, family history of breast cancer) were used to determine the women with high risk of breast cancer. The screening performance of clinical breast examination (CBE), breast ultrasonography (BUS), and mammography (MAM) were calculated and compared to determine the optimal screening method for these high risk women.
resultsA total of 94 breast cancers were detected among 31,720 asymptomatic Chinese women aged 45-65 years. Due to significantly higher detection rates (DRs) and suitable coverage of the population, high risk women were defined as those with any of 6 risk factors. Among high risk women, the DR for BUS [3.09/1,000 (33/10,694)] was similar to that for MAM [3.18/1,000 (34/10,696)], while it was significantly higher than that for the CBE [1.73/1,000 (19/10,959),
conclusionsThe low-cost high-risk screening strategy based on 6 questionnaire-based risk factors was an easy-to-use method to identify women with high risk of breast cancer. Moreover, BUS and MAM had comparable screening performances among high risk women.
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.