ArticleJournal of medical screening2024
The prognostic potential of mammographic growth rate of invasive breast cancer in the Nijmegen breast cancer screening cohort.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and internal validation of mammography feature-based prognostic models for distant recurrence-free survival of invasive breast cancer in a screening cohort.NPJ breast cancer · 2026Article
- Development of radiomics-based models on mammograms with mass lesions to predict prognostically relevant characteristics of invasive breast cancer in a screening cohort.British journal of cancer · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesInsight into the aggressiveness of potential breast cancers found in screening may optimize recall decisions. Specific growth rate (SGR), measured on mammograms, may provide valuable prognostic information. This study addresses the association of SGR with prognostic factors and overall survival in patients with invasive carcinoma of no special type (NST) from a screened population.
methodsIn this historic cohort study, 293 women with NST were identified from all participants in the Nijmegen screening program (2003-2007). Information on clinicopathological factors was retrieved from patient files and follow-up on vital status through municipalities. On consecutive mammograms, tumor volumes were estimated. After comparing five growth functions, SGR was calculated using the best-fitting function. Regression and multivariable survival analyses described associations between SGR and prognostic factors as well as overall survival.
resultsEach one standard deviation increase in SGR was associated with an increase in the Nottingham prognostic index by 0.34 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21-0.46]. Each one standard deviation increase in SGR increased the odds of a tumor with an unfavorable subtype (based on histologic grade and hormone receptors; odds ratio 2.14 [95% CI: 1.45-3.15]) and increased the odds of diagnosis as an interval cancer (versus screen-detected; odds ratio 1.57 [95% CI: 1.20-2.06]). After a median of 12.4 years of follow-up, 78 deaths occurred. SGR was not associated with overall survival (hazard ratio 1.12 [95% CI: 0.87-1.43]).
conclusionsSGR may indicate prognostically relevant differences in tumor aggressiveness if serial mammograms are available. A potential association with cause-specific survival could not be determined and is of interest for future research.
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.