ReviewInsights into imaging2023
Clinicopathological and prognostic value of calcification morphology descriptors in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Insights into imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of radiomics models for the diagnoses of breast lesions with calcification on ultrasound.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Imaging Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in the Era of De-Escalation: Role, Limits, and Clinical Implications for Risk-Adapted Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Mitigating overtreatment of ductal carcinoma in situ.Radiology advances · 2025Review
- Case Report: Breast ductal carcinomaFrontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Assessing the malignancy of suspicious breast microcalcifications: the role of contrast enhanced mammography.La Radiologia medica · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCalcifications on mammography can be indicative of breast cancer, but the prognostic value of their appearance remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the association between mammographic calcification morphology descriptors (CMDs) and clinicopathological factors.
methodsA comprehensive literature search in Medline via Ovid, Embase.com, and Web of Science was conducted for articles published between 2000 and January 2022 that assessed the relationship between CMDs and clinicopathological factors, excluding case reports and review articles. The risk of bias and overall quality of evidence were evaluated using the QUIPS tool and GRADE. A random-effects model was used to synthesize the extracted data. This systematic review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
resultsAmong the 4715 articles reviewed, 29 met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 17 different clinicopathological factors in relation to CMDs. Heterogeneity between studies was present and the overall risk of bias was high, primarily due to small, inadequately described study populations. Meta-analysis demonstrated significant associations between fine linear calcifications and high-grade DCIS [pooled odds ratio (pOR), 4.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.64-9.17], (comedo)necrosis (pOR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.29-9.30), (micro)invasion (pOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.03-2.27), and a negative association with estrogen receptor positivity (pOR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.12-0.89).
conclusionsCMDs detected on mammography have prognostic value, but there is a high level of bias and variability between current studies. In order for CMDs to achieve clinical utility, standardization in reporting of CMDs is necessary. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Mammographic calcification morphology descriptors (CMDs) have prognostic value, but in order for CMDs to achieve clinical utility, standardization in reporting of CMDs is necessary. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: CRD42022341599 KEY POINTS: • Mammographic calcifications can be indicative of breast cancer. • The prognostic value of mammographic calcifications is still unclear. • Specific mammographic calcification morphologies are related to lesion aggressiveness. • Variability between studies necessitates standardization in calcification evaluation to achieve clinical utility.
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.