Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34804981›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Evaluation of Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies for High-Risk Women in Beijing, China: A Real-World Population-Based Study.

Xi Zhang, Lei Yang, Shuo Liu, Huichao Li, Qingyu Li, Yangyang Cheng, Ning Wang, Jiafu Ji

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Epidemiology, early detection, and management of breast cancer in China: A comprehensive review.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Evaluation of a population-based breast cancer screening in North China.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xi ZhangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Lei YangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Shuo LiuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Huichao LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Qingyu LiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Yangyang ChengKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Ning WangKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Jiafu JiKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing), Beijing Office for Cancer Prevention and Control, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
Peking University · CNPeking University Cancer Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMammography-based breast cancer screening has been widely implemented in many developed countries. Evidence was needed on participation and diagnostic performance of population-based breast cancer screening using ultrasound in China.

methodsWe used data from the Cancer Screening Program in Urban China in Beijing from 2014 to 2019 and was followed up until July 2020 by matching with the Beijing Cancer Registry database. Eligible women between the ages of 45 and 69 years were recruited from six districts and assessed their risk of breast cancer through an established risk scoring system. Women evaluated to be at high risk of breast cancer were invited to undergo both ultrasound and mammography. Participation rates were calculated, and their associated factors were explored. In addition, the performance of five different breast cancer screening modalities was evaluated in this study.

resultsA total of 49,161 eligible women were recruited in this study. Among them, 15,550 women were assessed as high risk for breast cancer, and 7,500 women underwent ultrasound and/or mammography as recommended, with a participation rate of 48.2%. The sensitivity of mammography alone, ultrasound alone, combined of ultrasound and mammography, ultrasound for primary screening followed by mammography for triage, and mammography for preliminary screening followed by ultrasound for triage were19.2%, 38.5%, 50.0%, 46.2%, and 19.2%, and the specificity were 96.1%, 98.6%, 94.7%, 97.6%, 95.7%, respectively. The sensitivity of combined ultrasound and mammography, ultrasound for primary screening followed by mammography for triage, was significantly higher than mammography alone (p=0.008 and p=0.039). Additionally, ultrasound alone (48,323 RMB ($7,550)) and ultrasound for primary screening followed by mammography for triage (55,927 RMB ($8,739)) were the most cost-effective methods for breast cancer screening than other modalities.

conclusionsUltrasound alone and ultrasound for primary screening and mammography are superior to mammography for breast cancer screening in high-risk Chinese women.

Indexed as

breast cancer screeningChinese womendiagnostic performanceparticipation ratereal-world study

Identifiers

PMID34804981
PMCPMC8600225
OpenAlexW3211200074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.