ArticleAmerican journal of preventive cardiology2024
Does the absence of breast arterial calcification (BAC 0) rule out severe coronary artery disease? A computed tomography angiography study.
Article in American journal of preventive cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review of breast arterial calcifications for cardiovascular disease risk prediction.NPJ cardiovascular health · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cardiovascular risk (CV)-stratification in females is challenging, and current models miss a high proportion at-risk. Breast arterial calcifications (BAC) are independent prognosticators, but their interaction with the coronary artery disease profile by computed tomography (CT) is controverse, and the role of BAC 0 unclear. Objective: to investigate the interaction of BAC with coronary CT outcomes (CAC score, coronary stenosis severity and high-risk plaque (HRP). Methods: Consecutive patients referred to mammography (MG) and coronary CTA for clinical indications within 1 year were included. Three different age groups were compared (<55 years;55-65 years;>65 years). Results: 443 patients were included. There were significant age differences for the prevalence of BAC 0 (p<0.001), BAC 0/CAC>300 AU (p=0.0023) and obstructive disease (>50% stenosis)(p=0.0048) but not for high-risk-plaque (HRP)(p=0.4905). High CAC (>300 AU) was present in only 0.82% of females with BAC 0 in less than 55 year, but significantly more often in those above 65 years (p=0.0004;OR=16.58:95% CI: 2.829-361.7) and 55 years with 12.1% and 8.4%. Obstructive coronary disease (>50% stenosis) in BAC 0 was present in 18.2%; with age-dependent differences (10.7% vs 14.7% vs 29.9%) (p=0.0003). The correlation between BAC, CAC and CADRADS was weak (r=0.246 and r=0.243, p<0.001). There was no association of BAC with HRP. Conclusion: BAC 0 rules out severe CAC >300AU in females <55 years only, but not in those above 55 years- with adherent implications for primary prevention. However, BAC 0 does not to rule out obstructive disease and high-risk plaques in symptomatic patients among all age groups.
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.