Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40180638›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2025

Improving the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced mammography through lesion conspicuity and enhancement quantification.

Iris Allajbeu, Muzna Nanaa, Roido Manavaki, Vasiliki Papalouka, Ioana Bene, Nicholas Payne, Elisabetta Giannotti, Thiemo van Nijnatten, Fleur Kilburn-Toppin, Nuala Healy and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Iris AllajbeuDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Muzna NanaaDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Roido ManavakiDepartment of Radiology, Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Vasiliki PapaloukaBreast Unit, St Bartholomew's Hospital, West Smithfield, London, UK.
Ioana Bene'Iuliu Hatieganu' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Nicholas PayneDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Elisabetta GiannottiDepartment of Radiology, Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Thiemo van NijnattenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Fleur Kilburn-ToppinDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Nuala HealyMedical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Fiona GilbertDepartment of Radiology, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK. fjg28@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0124-9962

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo analyze qualitative and quantitative enhancement of breast lesions on CEM and their impact on specificity and overall diagnostic performance in predicting malignancy. A secondary objective was to compare lesion enhancement patterns between CEM and contrast-enhanced (CE)-MRI.

methodsThe cohort included screening and symptomatic cases from CEM research studies (December 2016-March 2023) with an identifiable lesion. Three breast radiologists independently assessed lesion conspicuity as low, moderate, or high, based on the BI-RADS CEM lexicon. Lesion enhancement was quantified by drawing two regions of interest representing lesion and background parenchyma, to calculate contrast enhancement from the early (CE

resultsFrom 503 CEM studies, 143 BI-RADS 2-5 lesions were analyzed. Lesion conspicuity was significantly associated with lesion histology (p < 0.001), contrast enhancement metrics (CE

conclusionBoth conspicuity and quantification of lesion enhancement can improve CEM specificity in predicting malignancy, with CE KEY POINTS: Question Quantifying lesion enhancement conspicuity on contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) has demonstrated potential in differentiating malignancy from benign lesions and BPE. Finding Contrast from the early recombined view (CEearly) performed better in discriminating malignant from benign lesions and BPE, with 90% specificity for BPE vs cancers. Clinical relevance Conspicuity and quantification of lesion enhancement on CEM can improve the specificity and overall diagnostic performance of CEM in cancer detection. Implementation of conspicuity thresholds in routine CEM interpretation could potentially reduce unnecessary recalls and benign biopsies.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsContrast MediaImage EnhancementMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammographyAdultAgedDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityContrast MediaBreast cancerConspicuityContrastContrast-enhanced mammographyEnhancement intensity

Identifiers

PMID40180638
PMCPMC12417241

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.