SynthesisJAMA2024
Screening for Breast Cancer: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
Synthesis in JAMA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Personalizing cancer risk: a systematic review of risk communication strategies.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Clinical guidelines for the management of mammographic density: a systematic review of breast screening guidelines worldwide.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Pooled it
- The Vanguard Study: Assessing feasibility of conducting randomized trials of novel multi-cancer detection tests.Contemporary clinical trials · 2026Article
- Performance and safety of a multi-cancer early detection test: the PATHFINDER 2 study.Nature medicine · 2026Article
- Persistent Racial Disparities in Breast Cancer Incidence by Stage and Subtype in a High-Burden State.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Radiological review of interval breast cancers following screening with DBT + DM or DM: results from MAITA project randomized trials.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- Exploring shear-wave elastography and apparent diffusion coefficient in breast lesion characterization: diagnostic accuracy and inter-modality correlation.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- Surgical Perspective on the Updated American College of Radiology Supplemental Screening Guidelines for Breast Density.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- From Materials to Medical Images: Translating Perovskite-Based X-Ray Detectors Toward Clinical Imaging.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Evaluating the Impact of an Educational Intervention on Community Pharmacists' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceptions Toward Breast Cancer Screening.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Supplemental Breast Ultrasound in Mammography Screening for Women with Critically Dense Breasts.Cancers · 2026Article
- Establishment of prediction model for breast lesion using automated breast ultrasound system.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Beyond mammography: Superior performance of ultrasound in early-onset breast cancer implications for age-specific, density-tailored screening.Turkish journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Optimizing mobile mammography deployment in Oklahoma 2024: a two-step floating catchment area approach.Geospatial health · 2026Article
- Review
- Enhancing breast cancer detection with AI for early diagnosis and recurrence prediction.Oncoscience · 2026Review
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of two major population-based breast cancer screening programmes in China: a model-based economic evaluation.BMJ public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality for US women. Trials have established that screening mammography can reduce mortality risk, but optimal screening ages, intervals, and modalities for population screening guidelines remain unclear. Objective: To review studies comparing different breast cancer screening strategies for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library through August 22, 2022; literature surveillance through March 2024. Study Selection: English-language publications; randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized studies comparing screening strategies; expanded criteria for screening harms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and quality; data extracted from fair- and good-quality studies. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality, morbidity, progression to advanced cancer, interval cancers, screening harms. Results: Seven randomized clinical trials and 13 nonrandomized studies were included; 2 nonrandomized studies reported mortality outcomes. A nonrandomized trial emulation study estimated no mortality difference for screening beyond age 74 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.19]). Advanced cancer detection did not differ following annual or biennial screening intervals in a nonrandomized study. Three trials compared digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) mammography screening with digital mammography alone. With DBT, more invasive cancers were detected at the first screening round than with digital mammography, but there were no statistically significant differences in interval cancers (pooled relative risk, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.64-1.17]; 3 studies [n = 130 196]; I2 = 0%). Risk of advanced cancer (stage II or higher) at the subsequent screening round was not statistically significant for DBT vs digital mammography in the individual trials. Limited evidence from trials and nonrandomized studies suggested lower recall rates with DBT. An RCT randomizing individuals with dense breasts to invitations for supplemental screening with magnetic resonance imaging reported reduced interval cancer risk (relative risk, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.29-0.77]) and additional false-positive recalls and biopsy results with the intervention; no longer-term advanced breast cancer incidence or morbidity and mortality outcomes were available. One RCT and 1 nonrandomized study of supplemental ultrasound screening reported additional false-positives and no differences in interval cancers. Conclusions and Relevance: Evidence comparing the effectiveness of different breast cancer screening strategies is inconclusive because key studies have not yet been completed and few studies have reported the stage shift or mortality outcomes necessary to assess relative benefits.
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.