Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38814817›Full record

Trial reportJNCI cancer spectrum2024

Effects of vitamin D supplementation on a deep learning-based mammographic evaluation in SWOG S0812.

Julia E McGuinness, Garnet L Anderson, Simukayi Mutasa, Dawn L Hershman, Mary Beth Terry, Parisa Tehranifar, Danika L Lew, Monica Yee, Eric A Brown, Sebastien S Kairouz and 13 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

23 authors.

Julia E McGuinnessDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5292-1440
Garnet L AndersonPublic Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Simukayi MutasaDepartment of Radiology, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
Dawn L HershmanDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Mary Beth TerryDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Parisa TehranifarDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Danika L LewSWOG Cancer Research Network, Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Monica YeeSWOG Cancer Research Network, Statistics and Data Management Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Eric A BrownWilliam Beaumont Hospital, Beaumont National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Troy, MI, USA.
Sebastien S KairouzCancer Care Specialists of Central Illinois, Heartland National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Decatur, IL, USA.
Nafisa KuwajerwalaWilliam Beaumont Hospital, Beaumont National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Troy, MI, USA.
Therese B BeversDepartment of Clinical Cancer Prevention, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
John E DosterAnderson Area Cancer Center, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Anderson, SC, USA.
Corrine ZarwanLahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA, USA.
Laura KruperDepartment of Breast Oncology, City of Hope Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
Lori M MinasianDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0472-4079
Leslie FordDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Banu ArunDepartment of Clinical Cancer Prevention, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Marian L NeuhouserPublic Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3876-0000
Gary E GoodmanSwedish Cancer Institute, Pacific Cancer Research Consortium National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program, Seattle, WA, USA.
Powel H BrownDepartment of Clinical Cancer Prevention, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Richard HaDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Katherine D CrewDepartment of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and the Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

SWOG Statistics & Data Management Center complex - extension supplement for GY06U10CA180819 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI Catherine M. Tangen · 2014 to 2026
$115.2M
SWOG NCORP Research BaseUG1CA189974 · NCI · THE HOPE FOUNDATION · PI CHARLES D. BLANKE, DAWN HERSHMAN · 2014 to 2026
$80.6M
Multicenter trial of decision support for breast cancer chemopreventionR01CA226060 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CREW, KATHERINE D, KUKAFKA, RITA · 2019 to 2023
$3.3M
NCI NIH HHS R01CA226060NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180819NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189974NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning-based mammographic evaluations could noninvasively assess response to breast cancer chemoprevention. We evaluated change in a convolutional neural network-based breast cancer risk model applied to mammograms among women enrolled in SWOG S0812, which randomly assigned 208 premenopausal high-risk women to receive oral vitamin D3 20 000 IU weekly or placebo for 12 months. We applied the convolutional neural network model to mammograms collected at baseline (n = 109), 12 months (n = 97), and 24 months (n = 67) and compared changes in convolutional neural network-based risk score between treatment groups. Change in convolutional neural network-based risk score was not statistically significantly different between vitamin D and placebo groups at 12 months (0.005 vs 0.002, P = .875) or at 24 months (0.020 vs 0.001, P = .563). The findings are consistent with the primary analysis of S0812, which did not demonstrate statistically significant changes in mammographic density with vitamin D supplementation compared with placebo. There is an ongoing need to evaluate biomarkers of response to novel breast cancer chemopreventive agents.

Indexed as

Breast DensityBreast NeoplasmsCholecalciferolDeep LearningDietary SupplementsMammographyAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeural Networks, ComputerPremenopauseRisk AssessmentVitamin DCholecalciferolVitamin D

Identifiers

PMID38814817
PMCPMC11216724

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.