Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38656711›Full record

GuidelineEuropean radiology2024

ESR Essentials: screening for breast cancer - general recommendations by EUSOBI.

Magda Marcon, Michael H Fuchsjäger, Paola Clauser, Ritse M Mann

Abstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in European radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. How Does ACR BI-RADSDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Diagnostic sensitivity of mammography and magnetic resonance imaging for ductal carcinomaChinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. National policies for screening and early detection of breast cancer around the globe: Practices, barriers, and solutions.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Magda MarconInstitute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland. magda.marcon@usz.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3923-8115
Michael H FuchsjägerDivision of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria.
Paola ClauserDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria.
Ritse M MannDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, Radboud University Medical Centre, Geert Grotteplein Zuid 10, 6525, GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women accounting for about 30% of all new cancer cases and the incidence is constantly increasing. Implementation of mammographic screening has contributed to a reduction in breast cancer mortality of at least 20% over the last 30 years. Screening programs usually include all women irrespective of their risk of developing breast cancer and with age being the only determining factor. This approach has some recognized limitations, including underdiagnosis, false positive cases, and overdiagnosis. Indeed, breast cancer remains a major cause of cancer-related deaths in women undergoing cancer screening. Supplemental imaging modalities, including digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, breast MRI, and, more recently, contrast-enhanced mammography, are available and have already shown potential to further increase the diagnostic performances. Use of breast MRI is recommended in high-risk women and women with extremely dense breasts. Artificial intelligence has also shown promising results to support risk categorization and interval cancer reduction. The implementation of a risk-stratified approach instead of a "one-size-fits-all" approach may help to improve the benefit-to-harm ratio as well as the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening. KEY POINTS: Regular mammography should still be considered the mainstay of the breast cancer screening. High-risk women and women with extremely dense breast tissue should use MRI for supplemental screening or US if MRI is not available. Women need to participate actively in the decision to undergo personalized screening. KEY RECOMMENDATIONS: Mammography is an effective imaging tool to diagnose breast cancer in an early stage and to reduce breast cancer mortality (evidence level I). Until more evidence is available to move to a personalized approach, regular mammography should be considered the mainstay of the breast cancer screening. High-risk women should start screening earlier; first with yearly breast MRI which can be supplemented by yearly or biennial mammography starting at 35-40 years old (evidence level I). Breast MRI screening should be also offered to women with extremely dense breasts (evidence level I). If MRI is not available, ultrasound can be performed as an alternative, although the added value of supplemental ultrasound regarding cancer detection remains limited. Individual screening recommendations should be made through a shared decision-making process between women and physicians.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammographyFemaleHumansMass ScreeningRisk AssessmentUltrasonography, MammaryBreast neoplasmsEarly detection of cancerMagnetic resonance imagingMammographyUltrasonography (mammary)

Identifiers

PMID38656711
PMCPMC11399176

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.