ArticleKorean journal of radiology2025
Surveillance Outcomes by Imaging Methods in the First 5 Years After Breast Cancer Surgery.
Article in Korean journal of radiology, 2025. 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.
- Association of Breast Tissue Composition on Preoperative Automated Breast Ultrasound With Accuracy of Cancer Multiplicity Evaluation and Recurrence-Free Survival in Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Screening Outcomes of Supplemental Automated Breast Ultrasound in Women With Nondense Breasts Undergoing Mammography.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the outcomes of imaging methods (mammography alone, ultrasound [US] alone, mammography combined with US, and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]-based examination) for surveillance during the first 5 years after breast cancer surgery. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective cohort study analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent breast cancer surgery at a single institution between January 2011 and December 2015. Imaging surveillance was performed at 6-month or 1-year intervals during the first 5 years.
resultsA total of 6371 women (median age, 49 years; age range, 20-90 years) underwent 28199 mammograms, 42759 US, and 2619 MRI examinations. Of 172 second breast cancer diagnoses, 19 (11.0%) were interval cancers. Mammography combined with US demonstrated higher cancer detection rate (CDR) compared to mammography alone (odds ratios [OR] = 3.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.52-8.96,
conclusionThe CDR of surveillance mammography combined with US was comparable with that of MRI-based examinations in an intensive surveillance setting. Considering the significant interaction between MBD and the CDR, a tailored approach for surveillance based on breast density is warranted.
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.