Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40146116›Full record

ArticleJAMA oncology2025

Incidence and Risk Factors of Interval and Screen-Detected Breast Cancer.

Yuqi Zhang, Juan Rodriguez, Xinhe Mao, Felix Grassmann, Jose Tapia, Mikael Eriksson, Per Hall, Kamila Czene

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. The influence of virtual reality on anxiety and pain in breast cancer patients: A systematic review.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Yuqi ZhangDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Juan RodriguezDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Xinhe MaoDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Felix GrassmannDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jose TapiaDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mikael ErikssonDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Per HallDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kamila CzeneDepartment of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Mammographic screening is the only proven method for early detection and mortality reduction of breast cancer (BC). However, many patients are missed at prior screening; thus, they receive their diagnosis between the interval of screening rounds, called interval cancer (IntCa). Some IntCas are fast growing between screening rounds. Objective: To investigate the incidence and proportion of IntCa and screen-detected breast cancer (ScrCa) and identify factors associated with IntCa. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study was conducted from January 1989 to March 2020, with follow-up until 2020 and a mean (SD) follow-up of 13 (8.3) years. The statistical analysis was performed from February 2023 to June 2024. It included cancer-free women (N = 527 144) residing in Stockholm, Sweden, who were invited to undergo mammography screening (aged 40-74 years) during 1989 to 2020. An additional cohort of women were included who were participating in the Karolinska Mammography Project for Risk Prediction of Breast Cancer study and had mammography data available. Exposures: Family cancer history (defined from the Swedish Multi-Generation Register and Cancer Register), mammographic density, and various demographic, reproductive, and other factors (multiple Swedish registers). Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence of ScrCa and IntCa (defined from the Swedish Cancer Register in conjunction with individual screening histories). Results: A total of 29 049 women (5.5%) received a diagnosis of BC, of whom 10 631 (2.0%) had ScrCa and 4369 (0.8%) IntCa. ScrCa and IntCa incidences increased during the period. The proportion of IntCa among screened patients with BC was around 30%, which decreased with older age. Factors associated with increased risk of IntCa included older age at first childbirth, higher education level, hormone replacement therapy, and higher mammographic density. Risk estimates of family cancer history on IntCa were family history of BC (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.72-1.99), family history of IntCa (HR, 2.92; 95% CI, 2.39-3.55), and hereditary breast and ovarian cancers (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.36-1.54), with risk further elevated with the number of relatives who received a diagnosis when younger than the median age. Women with IntCa were more likely to have estrogen receptor (ER)-negative cancers than women with ScrCa (22% vs 11%), and having family history of ER-negative BC was associated with 3-fold risk for ER-negative IntCa. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study suggest that IntCa rates have not decreased with age-based screening, and implementing risk-based screening considering IntCa-specific risk factors is necessary for improving outcomes.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerMammographyAdultAgedBreast DensityCohort StudiesFemaleHumansIncidenceMass ScreeningMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSweden

Identifiers

PMID40146116
PMCPMC11950978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.