ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024
Diagnostic performance of additional imaging tests for staging purposes in a bicentric German series of low-risk early breast cancer patients.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Staging Investigations in HER2-Low, Low-Risk Patients.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Can Ki-67 serve as a suitable marker to indicate the necessity of staging diagnostics in cases of low-risk breast cancer?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLow-risk early breast cancer rarely leads to the development of metastatic disease, and in these patients, additional imaging test is controversial. The aim of our study was to evaluate the conventional staging procedures in a bicentric German series of low-risk breast carcinoma patients.
methodsRetrospective evaluation of all patients diagnosed with early, low-risk breast cancer at Saarland University Hospital and Freiburg University Hospital in 2017 was performed. Clinical patient characteristics, the number and type of additional imaging examinations, follow-up examinations, and results were evaluated. The detection rate of metastases and the rate of false-positive findings were analyzed.
resultsA total of 203 patients were included, with all patients received at least one additional imaging test. Initially, a total of 562 additional imaging examinations were performed: 166 chest X-rays, 169 upper abdominal ultrasounds, 199 bone scans, 27 computer tomographies (CT) chest and abdomen, and 1 CT abdomen. 6.8% of patients had abnormal findings reported, requiring 38 additional imaging examinations. One patient (0.5%) was found to have bone metastases. The rate of false-positive findings in the performed additional imaging procedures was 6.6%.
conclusionMetastatic disease was detected in one of 203 patients with low-risk early breast cancer. A total of 562 examinations and additional 38 follow-up examinations were performed without detection of metastasis (this corresponds to approximately 3 examinations/patient). The rate of false-positive findings was 6.6%. The performance of additional imaging procedures for detection of distant metastases should be critically reconsidered in patients with low-risk early breast 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.