ReviewAmerican journal of translational research2025
Meta-analysis of the synergistic effect of magnetic resonance imaging and mammography in breast cancer detection in women with dense breasts.
Review in American journal of translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the combined effectiveness of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and mammography in detecting breast cancer in women with dense breasts.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases up to December 31, 2023, to identify relevant studies. Studies focusing on breast cancer detection in women with dense breast tissue and providing data on the sensitivity, specificity, or positive predictive value of combined MRI and mammography screening, or the use of MRI following a negative mammogram, were included. The meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 15.0, and study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool.
resultsTen studies, involving 51,602 participants, were included in the meta-analysis. The combined use of MRI and mammography for breast cancer detection in women with dense breasts yielded a pooled sensitivity of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79-0.92), specificity of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.89-0.97), positive likelihood ratio of 2.55 (95% CI: 1.45-4.46), negative likelihood ratio of 0.11 (95% CI: 0.07-0.17), diagnostic score of 3.18 (95% CI: 2.35-4.02), and diagnostic ratio of 24.14 (95% CI: 10.44-55.81), and an area under the Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95-0.98).
conclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrated that the combination of MRI and mammography enhanced breast cancer detection in women with dense breasts. This synergistic approach significantly improves detection sensitivity in this high-risk group.
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.