ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023
Results of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Screening in Patients at High Risk for Breast Cancer.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence for triple-negative breast cancer from imaging to multi-omics.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- The Evolution and Clinical Impact of Deep Learning Technologies in Breast MRI.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025Review
- Application value of MRI-guided wire localization to the non-palpable breast lesions only shown in Breast MRI.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScreening MRI as an adjunct to mammography is recommended by the ACS for patients with a lifetime risk for breast cancer > 20%. While the benefits are clear, MRI screening is associated with an increase in false-positive results. The purpose of this study was to analyze our institutional database of high-risk patients and assess the uptake of screening MRI examinations and the results of those screenings.
methodsOur institutional review board-approved High-Risk Breast Cancer Database was queried for patients enrolled from January 2017 to January 2023 who were at high risk for breast cancer in a comparative analysis between those who were screened versus not screened with MRIs. Variables of interest included risk factor, background, MRI screening uptake, and frequency and results of image-guided breast biopsies.
resultsA total of 254 of 1106 high-risk patients (23%) had MRI screening. Forty-six of 852 (5.3%) patients in the non-MRI-screened cohort and nine of 254 (3.5%) patients in the MRI-screened cohort were diagnosed with a malignant lesion after image-guided biopsy (p = 0.6). There was no significant difference between MRI and non-MRI guided biopsies in detecting breast cancer. All malignant lesions were T1 or in situ disease. The 254 patients in the MRI-screened group underwent 185 biopsies. Fifty-seven percent of MRI-guided biopsies yielded benign results.
conclusionsAlthough the addition of MRI screening in our high-risk cohort did not produce a significant number of additional cancer diagnoses, patients monitored in our high-risk cohort who developed breast cancer were diagnosed at very early stages of disease, underscoring the benefit of participation in the program.
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.