Trial reportThe British journal of radiology2023
Two-year follow-up of participants in the BreastScreen Victoria pilot trial of tomosynthesis versus mammography: breast density-stratified screening outcomes.
Trial report in The British journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interval breast cancer rates for tomosynthesis vs mammography population screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.European radiology · 2025Pooled it
- Psychosocial outcomes and health service use after notifying women participating in population breast screening when they have dense breasts: a BreastScreen Queensland randomised controlled trial.The Medical journal of Australia · 2023Trial
- Impact of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis on Extra Views and Concomitant Ultrasound Examinations in One Year Post Breast-Conserving Surgery Patients.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2025Article
- Current Strategies to Reducing Interval Breast Cancers: A Systematic Review.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2025Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis follow-up study of BreastScreen Victoria's pilot trial of digital breast tomosynthesis aimed to report interval cancer rates, screening sensitivity, and density-stratified outcomes for tomosynthesis
methodsProspective pilot trial [ACTRN-12617000947303] in Maroondah BreastScreen recruited females ≥ 40 years presenting for screening (August 2017-November 2018) to DBT; concurrent screening participants who received mammography formed a comparison group. Follow-up of 24 months from screen date was used to ascertain interval cancers; automated breast density was measured.
resultsThere were 48 screen-detected and 9 interval cancers amongst 4908 tomosynthesis screens, and 34 screen-detected and 16 interval cancers amongst 5153 mammography screens. Interval cancer rate was 1.8/1000 (95%CI 0.8-3.5) for tomosynthesis
conclusionAlthough interval cancer rates did not significantly differ between screened groups, sensitivity was significantly higher for tomosynthesis than mammography screening. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: In a program-embedded pilot trial, both increased cancer detection and recall rates from tomosynthesis were predominantly observed in high-density screens.
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.