Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39123423›Full record

ArticleCancers2024

Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM) for Monitoring Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response among Different Breast Cancer Subtypes.

Sofia Vidali, Giovanni Irmici, Catherine Depretto, Chiara Bellini, Francesca Pugliese, Ludovica Anna Incardona, Federica Di Naro, Diego De Benedetto, Giacomo Di Filippo, Fabiola Ferraro and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

14 authors.

Sofia VidaliBreast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5982-4387
Giovanni IrmiciBreast Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Catherine DeprettoBreast Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4732-6051
Chiara BelliniBreast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4243-8719
Francesca PuglieseBreast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0009-0001-8083-5870
Ludovica Anna IncardonaBreast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0009-0003-2736-4701
Federica Di NaroBreast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Diego De BenedettoBreast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.
Giacomo Di FilippoUOC Endocrinochirurgia, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, 37134 Verona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8466-6787
Fabiola FerraroDepartment of Biomedicine Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics (BiND), University of Palermo, 90133 Palermo, Italy.
Claudia De BerardinisBreast Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Vittorio MieleDepartment of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7848-1567
Gianfranco ScaperrottaBreast Radiology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Jacopo Nori CucchiariBreast Imaging Unit, Department of Radiology, Careggi University Hospital, 50134 Florence, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) plays a crucial role in breast cancer (BC) treatment, both in advanced BC and in early-stage BC, with different rates of pathological complete response (pCR) among the different BC molecular subtypes. Imaging monitoring is mandatory to evaluate the NAT efficacy. This study evaluates the diagnostic performance of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM) in BC patients undergoing NAT. This retrospective two-center study included 174 patients. The breast lesions were classified based on the molecular subtypes in hormone receptor (HR+)/HER2-, HER2+, and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). The histopathological analysis performed following surgery was used as a reference standard for the pCR. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were measured overall and for the different subtypes. We enrolled 174 patients, 79/174 (46%) HR+/HER2-, 59/174 (33.9%) HER2+, and 35/174 (20.1%) TNBC; the pCR was found in 64/174 (36.8%), of which 57.1% were TNBCs. In the total population, the CEM sensitivity and specificity were 66.2% and 75.2%, with a PPV of 61.4% and an NPV of 78.8%. The highest specificity (80.9%) and NPV (91.7%) were found in HR+/HER2-, while the highest sensitivity (70%) and PPV appeared (73.7%) in TNBC. The results indicate that CEM is a valid tool to assess the pCR, with different performances among the subtypes of BC.

Indexed as

breast cancer biologic featuresCEMcontrast-enhanced mammographylocally advanced breast cancerneoadjuvant therapypCR

Identifiers

PMID39123423
PMCPMC11311316

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.