SynthesisRadiology. Imaging cancer2025
Performance of Diagnostic Breast Imaging in Symptomatic Pregnant and Lactating Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Radiology. Imaging cancer, 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.
- Diagnostic accuracy of an artificial intelligence-based breast ultrasound tool in pregnant and lactating patients.European radiology · 2026Article
- For want of a nail, region-based qualitative BPE.European 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose To perform a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis to summarize the diagnostic performance of breast imaging modalities for cancer detection in pregnant and lactating patients. Materials and Methods A systematic review of the literature in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases published up until March 3, 2023, was conducted. Included studies evaluated patients of any age who underwent breast imaging during pregnancy or lactation. The primary outcome of this review was sensitivity and specificity of each imaging modality. Meta-analysis was performed using a bivariate modeling approach, and summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to generate a summary area under the ROC curve (AUC). Results Twenty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and included 1681 female patients (mean age, 33 years; range, 18-49 years). For US, seven of 24 studies had complete data yielding an AUC of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.93), a sensitivity of 81% (95% CI: 56, 94), and a specificity of 85% (95% CI: 71, 92). For mammography, three of 21 studies had complete data yielding an AUC of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.97), a sensitivity of 72% (95% CI: 47, 88), and a specificity of 93% (95% CI: 86, 97). For MRI, two of eight studies had complete data yielding an AUC of 95% (95% CI: 59, 96), a sensitivity of 91% (95% CI: 56, 99), and a specificity of 88% (95% CI: 48, 98). Conclusion US, mammography, and breast MRI showed high diagnostic performance for detection of pregnancy-associated breast cancer in symptomatic pregnant or lactating patients.
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.