Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40450633›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2025

Breast imaging recommendations for young females (age < 40 years) with ≥ 20% lifetime breast cancer risk: practice patterns at a specialized clinic.

Alexandra Wehbe, Fisher Katlin, Eshita Sharma, Marybeth Hans, Mary Knust Graichen, Brittany L Bychkovsky, Rochelle Scheib, Judy E Garber, Lydia E Pace, Tari A King and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Alexandra WehbeDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Fisher KatlinDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Eshita SharmaDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Marybeth HansDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Mary Knust GraichenDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Brittany L BychkovskyMedical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Rochelle ScheibMedical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Judy E GarberMedical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Lydia E PaceHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Tari A KingDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. tking7@bwh.harvard.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3602-2351
Alison LawsDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and American Cancer Society (ACS) endorse differing guidelines for screening breast imaging among young females with familial breast cancer risk not driven by a germline pathogenic variant (PV). We sought to characterize practice patterns in our high-risk breast clinic related to screening breast imaging in this population.

methodsWe identified all females aged 25-39 years with a first- or second-degree relative (FDR/SDR) with breast cancer and estimated lifetime breast cancer risk of ≥ 20% by the Tyrer-Cuzick (TC) version 7 model. Those with known PV in a breast cancer gene were excluded. We described provider recommendations for age to initiate screening and use of supplemental imaging modalities.

resultsAmong 334 included patients, 218 (65.3%) had an FDR with breast cancer and 116 (34.7%) had SDRs only. Screening prior to age 40 was recommended to 233 (69.8%) patients and varied by extent of family history and age of the youngest affected relative. Only a minority (24.1-27.0%) of recommendations aligned with NCCN or ACS guidelines. For the remaining patients, 82.2% and 48.7% were recommended to initiate screening younger than the NCCN or ACS guideline, respectively. Supplemental imaging with MRI or whole breast ultrasound was offered to 219 (65.6%) patients.

conclusionEven in a specialized clinic, there is substantial variation in breast imaging recommendations for young females with elevated breast cancer risk based on family history. As formal risk assessment is increasingly adopted in clinical practice, this population should be a priority for future screening imaging studies.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerPractice Patterns, Physicians'AdultAge FactorsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMammographyPractice Guidelines as TopicRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsBreast cancer screeningBreast imagingFamily historyHigh-risk for breast cancerYoung women

Identifiers

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.