ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings2023
Breast Cancer Mode of Detection in a Population-Based Cohort.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determinants of stage at breast cancer diagnosis across different healthcare systems: an international multicentre cohort study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Exercise trajectories and current exercise and risk of breast cancer: a cohort study of 325,953 women who participated in BreastScreen Norway.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- "Screening isn't Your Ticket to Vacation": In-depth Interviews With Women in the United States Who Experienced an Interval Breast Cancer.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate how breast cancers come to clinical attention (mode of detection [MOD]) in a population-based cohort, determine the relative frequency of different MODs, and characterize patient and tumor characteristics associated with MOD. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe used the Rochester Epidemiology Project to identify women ages 40 to 75 years with a first-time diagnosis of breast cancer from May 9, 2017, to May 9, 2019 (n=500) in a 9-county region in Minnesota. We conducted a retrospective medical record review to ascertain the relative frequency of MODs, evaluating differences between screening mammography vs all other MODs by breast density and cancer characteristics. Multiple logistic regression was conducted to examine the likelihood of MOD for breast density and stage of disease.
resultsIn our population-based cohort, 162 of 500 breast cancers (32.4%) were detected by MODs other than screening mammography, including 124 (24.8%) self-detected cancers. Compared with women with mammography-detected cancers, those with MODs other than screening mammography were more frequently younger than 50 years of age (P=.004) and had higher-grade tumors (P=.007), higher number of positive lymph nodes (P<.001), and larger tumor size (P<.001). Relative to women with mammography-detected cancers, those with MODs other than screening mammography were more likely to have dense breasts (odds ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.92; P=.006) and advanced cancer at diagnosis (odds ratio, 3.58; 95% CI, 2.29 to 5.58; P<.001).
conclusionOne-third of all breast cancers in this population were detected by MODs other than screening mammography. Increased likelihood of nonmammographic MODs was observed among women with dense breasts and advanced cancer.
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.