ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2023
Comparative Evaluation of Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Diagnosing and Treating Breast Cancer.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Achieving single-contrast administration for enhanced chest CT and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography without compromising diagnostic quality: a comparative study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
- Contrast-enhanced mammography improves patient access to functional breast imaging.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in the diagnosis and chemotherapy of breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed data on 125 lesions of 115 patients with breast diseases in Lanzhou First People's Hospital from January 2020 to June 2022. Patients were examined by digital breast tomographic fusion and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography after chemotherapy. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of the 2 imaging techniques, and the diagnostic efficacy was evaluated with ROC curves. RESULTS There were significant differences in the type and degree of CESM enhancement between benign and malignant lesions. Malignant lesions mostly showed moderate to severe enhancement, while benign lesions mostly showed mild to moderate enhancement. There was no significant difference in DBT manifestations between benign and malignant lesions. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 88 patients had pathological remission, and the remission rate was 70.40%. Thirty-seven patients did not respond (nonresponse rate: 29.60%). The accuracy of CESM lesion size assessment was 84.00% (105/125), with high consistency. The accuracy of DBT lesion size assessment was 68.00% (85/125), and the consistency was poor. BI-RADS 4B was the truncation point. CESM had significantly higher sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value than DBT. In premenopausal patients and patients aged less than 50 years, the diagnostic efficacy of DBT and CESM was significantly different. CONCLUSIONS The diagnostic efficacy of CESM was significantly better than DBT in premenopausal women and patients under age 50. Diagnosis and treatment of breast diseases may be enhanced by the use of CESM.
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.