ReviewInsights into imaging2024
The paradox of MRI for breast cancer screening: high-risk and dense breasts-available evidence and current practice.
Review in Insights into imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of pre-operative MRI on the in-breast tumor recurrence rate of patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Early, delayed, or combined contrast-enhanced mammography for detecting residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.European radiology · 2026Article
- MMBCFNet: multi modal hybrid deep learning framework for breast cancer detection using MRI, mammography, and ultrasound images.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- European Cancer Prevention Organization on cancer screening: an expert panel position paper.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- Adapted foundation models for breast MRI triaging in contrast-enhanced and non-contrast-enhanced protocols.European radiology · 2026Article
- Global Curriculum in Surgical Oncology: 2nd Edition, 2026.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Review
- Exploring shear-wave elastography and apparent diffusion coefficient in breast lesion characterization: diagnostic accuracy and inter-modality correlation.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- Screening Breast MRI and Genetic Testing Utilization in High-risk Population: Analysis of National Health Interview Survey.Journal of breast imaging · 2026Article
- Breast Cancer: Epidemiology, Molecular Classification, Diagnostics and Evolving Treatment Paradigms.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- WDCN: a comprehensive neural network based approach for estimating breast cancer risk.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Assessing breast MRI image quality: the bMRI-QUAL scoring system.European radiology · 2026Article
- How to optimise breast cancer staging with contrast-enhanced mammography: current evidence and clinical implications.Insights into imaging · 2026Review
- Sustainability of contrast-enhanced breast imaging: a review of current evidence.Insights into imaging · 2026Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging as a non-invasive breast cancer tool - the relevance of breast edema score: A retrospective study.World journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Reported Breast MRI Among U.S. Women Undergoing Screening Mammography: a National Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Establishing an Evidence-based Modern Breast MRI Program.Journal of breast imaging · 2026Review
- Integrating morphology, vascularity, and elasticity: diagnostic role of multiparametric quantitative ultrasound in breast lesions.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Radiomics analysis of biplanar ultrasound images can discriminate non-mass breast carcinoma from mastitis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Contrast-enhanced mammography versus breast MRI: a multidimensional cost-effectiveness analysis.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the mid-1990s, the identification of BRCA1/2 genes for breast cancer susceptibility led to testing breast MRI accuracy in screening women at increased risk. From 2000 onwards, ten intraindividual comparative studies showed the marked superiority of MRI: the sensitivity ranged 25-58% for mammography, 33-52% for ultrasound, 48-67% for mammography plus ultrasound, and 71-100% for MRI; specificity 93-100%, 91-98%, 89-98%, and 81-98%, respectively. Based on the available evidence, in 2006-2007, the UK National Institute for Clinical Excellence and the American Cancer Society recommended MRI screening of high-risk women, followed by other international guidelines. Despite evidence-based medicine ideally requiring randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for policy changes regarding screening procedures, breast MRI for high-risk screening was adopted in many countries worldwide. In 2019, the results of the "DENSE" RCT were published in favour of breast MRI screening of women with extremely dense breasts compared to mammography alone, showing a reduction of more than 80% of the interval cancer rate in women who attended MRI screening. Even though international recommendations in favour of this practice were issued, substantial obstacles still prevent health systems from adopting breast MRI for screening women with extremely dense breasts. A paradox is evident: we adopted a screening procedure without evidence from RCTs, and now that we have this level-1 evidence for the same procedure, we fail to do so. This critical review tries to explain the differences between the two cases, as examples of the complex pathways of translating radiological research into everyday practice.Critical relevance statement The high-level evidence in favour of breast MRI screening of women with extremely dense breasts is failing to persuade policy makers to translate this into clinical practice.Key points• Breast MRI screening of high-risk women was adopted on basis of the evidence provided by test accuracy comparative studies showing an MRI performance greatly superior to that of mammography.• Breast MRI screening of women with extremely dense breasts has not been adopted although the evidence of a large reduction in interval cancer rate from a RCT.• We illustrate the differences between the two cases, as an example of the complex ways of translation of radiological research in clinical practice according to the EBM theory.
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.