ArticleCancers2025
Lesion Conspicuity in Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: A Retrospective Analysis of Tumor Characteristics.
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical significance of lesion conspicuity on contrast-enhanced mammography.European radiology · 2026Article
- Clinical Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Versus Breast MRI in Women at Increased Breast Cancer Risk.Cancers · 2026Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Deep Learning-Derived Malignancy Scoring in Breast Cancer Molecular Subtype Assessment.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Mammography in Breast Lesion Assessment: Accuracy and Surgical Impact.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of tumor characteristics on lesion conspicuity in contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and identify factors associated with different levels of conspicuity.
methodsIn this retrospective study, we analyzed 552 patients with breast cancer who underwent CEM. Lesion conspicuity was categorized into three levels: 1 (low), 2 (moderate), and 3 (high). Tumor characteristics included age, histological subtype, hormone receptor status, HER2 status, Ki67 index, tumor grade, and molecular subtype. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to assess associations between lesion conspicuity and these factors.
resultsOf the 552 cases, the majority showed mass enhancement (78.1%), followed by non-mass enhancement (NME) (16.8%), and a combination of mass and NME (4.0%). Lesion conspicuity was significantly associated with enhancement type on CEM (
conclusionsLesion conspicuity in CEM is primarily influenced by the type of enhancement and tumor size. Mass-forming lesions, particularly larger ones, are more conspicuous, while NME tends to result in lower conspicuity. These findings suggest that enhancement patterns and tumor dimensions are key factors to consider when interpreting CEM in breast cancer diagnosis.
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.