ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2021
Multifocality and Multicentrality in Breast Cancer: Comparison of the Efficiency of Mammography, Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in a Group of Patients with Primarily Operable Breast Cancer.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Review
- Article
- Advancing clinical staging in invasive breast carcinoma: the role of contrast-enhanced mammography.Polish journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Identification of sentinel lymph node macrometastasis in breast cancer by deep learning based on clinicopathological characteristics.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- State-of-the-art for contrast-enhanced mammography.The British journal of radiology · 2024Review
- Preoperative prediction of nodal status using clinical data and artificial intelligence derived mammogram features enabling abstention of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Noninvasive Staging of Lymph Node Status in Breast Cancer Using Machine Learning: External Validation and Further Model Development.JMIR cancer · 2023Article
- Invasive Lobular Carcinoma: A Review of Imaging Modalities with Special Focus on Pathology Concordance.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Surgical Planning after Neoadjuvant Treatment in Breast Cancer: A Multimodality Imaging-Based Approach Focused on MRI.Cancers · 2023Review
- Breast MRI-the Importance of Type II and III Dynamic Curves Evaluation and Framing in BI-RADS 4C and 5 Score.Current health sciences journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe multifocality and multicentrality of breast cancer (MFMCC) are the significant aspects that determine a specialist's choice between applying breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or performing a mastectomy. This study aimed to assess the usefulness of mammography (MG), contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in women diagnosed with breast cancer before qualifying for surgical intervention to visualize other (additional) cancer foci.
methodsThe study included 60 breast cancer cases out of 630 patients initially who underwent surgery due to breast cancer from January 2015 to April 2019. MG, CESM, and MRI were compared with each other in terms of the presence of MFMCC and assessed for compliance with the postoperative histopathological examination (HP).
resultsHistopathological examination confirmed the presence of MFMCC in 33/60 (55%) patients. The sensitivity of MG in detecting MFMCC was 50%, and its specificity was 95.83%. For CESM, the sensitivity was 85.29%, and the specificity was 96.15%. For MRI, all the above-mentioned parameters were higher as follows: sensitivity-91.18%; specificity-92.31%.
conclusionsIn patients with MFMCC, both CESM and MRI are highly sensitive in the detection of additional cancer foci. Both CESM and MRI change the extent of surgical intervention in every fourth patient.
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.