Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38556593›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2024

CEM immediately after contrast-enhanced CT: a one-step staging of breast cancer.

Antonietta Ancona, Michele Telegrafo, Rita Roberta Fella, Donato Iamele, Sebastiano Cantore, Marco Moschetta

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology experimental, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Antonietta AnconaSection of Breast Imaging, Breast Care Unit, Santa Maria Hospital GVM-BA, Via Antonio De Ferrariis 22, Bari, 70124, Italy.
Michele TelegrafoBreast Care Unit, University Hospital Consortium Policlinico of Bari, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, Bari, 70124, Italy.
Rita Roberta FellaSection of Breast Imaging, Breast Care Unit, Santa Maria Hospital GVM-BA, Via Antonio De Ferrariis 22, Bari, 70124, Italy.
Donato IameleSection of Breast Imaging, Breast Care Unit, Santa Maria Hospital GVM-BA, Via Antonio De Ferrariis 22, Bari, 70124, Italy.
Sebastiano CantoreSection of Breast Imaging, Breast Care Unit, Santa Maria Hospital GVM-BA, Via Antonio De Ferrariis 22, Bari, 70124, Italy.
Marco MoschettaDIM, Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, Aldo Moro University of Bari Medical School, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, Bari, 70124, Italy. marco.moschetta@gmail.com.
Santa Maria Nuova Hospital · ITUniversity of Bari Aldo Moro · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is a promising technique. We evaluated the diagnostic potential of CEM performed immediately after contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT).

methodsFifty patients with breast cancer underwent first CE-CT and then CEM without additional contrast material injection. Two independent radiologists evaluated CEM images. The sensitivity of CEM for detecting index and additional malignant lesions was compared with that of mammography/ultrasonography by the McNemar test, using histopathology as a reference standard. Interobserver agreement for detection of malignant lesions, for classifying index tumors, and for evaluating index tumor size and extent was assessed using Cohen κ. Pearson correlation was used for correlating index tumor size/extent at CEM or mammography/ultrasonography with histopathology.

resultsOf the 50 patients, 30 (60%) had unifocal disease while 20 (40%) had multicentric or multifocal disease; 5 of 20 patients with multicentric disease (25%) had bilateral involvement, for a total of 78 malignant lesions, including 72 (92%) invasive ductal and 6 (8%) invasive lobular carcinomas. Sensitivity was 63/78 (81%, 95% confidence interval 70.27-88.82) for unenhanced breast imaging and 78/78 (100%, 95.38-100) for CEM (p < 0.001). The interobserver agreement for overall detection of malignant lesions, for classifying index tumor, and for evaluating index tumor size/extent were 0.94, 0.95, and 0.86 κ, respectively. For index tumor size/extent, correlation coefficients as compared with histological specimens were 0.50 for mammography/ultrasonography and 0.75 for CEM (p ≤ 0.010).

conclusionsCEM acquired immediately after CE-CT without injection of additional contrast material showed a good performance for local staging of breast cancer. RELEVANCE STATEMENT: When the CEM suite is near to the CE-CT acquisition room, CEM acquired immediately after, without injection of additional contrast material, could represent a way for local staging of breast cancer to be explored in larger prospective studies. KEY POINTS: • CEM represents a new accurate tool in the field of breast imaging. • An intravenous injection of iodine-based contrast material is required for breast gland evaluation. • CEM after CE-CT could provide a one-stop tool for breast cancer staging.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsContrast MediaFemaleHumansMammographyProspective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedContrast MediaBreast neoplasmsContrast mediaMammography (contrast-enhanced)Neoplasms stagingTomography (x-ray computed)

Identifiers

PMID38556593
PMCPMC10982147
OpenAlexW4393390975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.