ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Breast cancer in women after withdrawing from an increased-risk MRI screening program.
Article in European radiology, 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
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates breast cancer (BC) detection in women with ≥ 20% lifetime risk who discontinued annual breast MRI screening surveillance. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective single screening cohort (2003-2019) study included 3308 women who received at least one breast MRI. After verifying with the Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), a sub-population of women who developed BC after discontinuation was identified. Screening indications, BC incidence rates, tumor characteristics, and reasons for MRI screening discontinuation were compared between women who continued and those who discontinued MRI screening using descriptive and inferential methods.
resultsAmong 3308 participants, 2647 discontinued MRI screening. After discontinuation, 58/2647 (2.2%) developed BC (43 invasive, 13 DCIS, 2 NA). Initial screening indications included: personal (26/58, 44.8%) or family history (17/58, 29.3%) of BC, BRCA1 (3/58, 5.2%), BRCA2 (1/58, 1.7%), chest irradiation (1/58, 1.7%), other mutations (2/58, 3.4%) and other (8/58, 13.8%). Of these, 27 continued mammography screening, detecting 23 BC-cases. Discontinuation was mainly physician-driven. Invasive tumor size after cessation of MRI screening tended to be larger compared to tumors detected while participating in MRI screening (median difference: 7.0 mm, 95% CI: 4.0-10.0, p < 0.001). Mean age at diagnosis was 58. Median time from last MRI to diagnosis was 5.9 years.
conclusionWomen with a personal or family history of BC commonly discontinued MRI screening, often influenced by referring physicians. However, after cessation of MRI screening, a substantial number of these women are still diagnosed with BC, challenging current MRI screening regulations. Although a last negative MRI appears to reduce the subsequent decade's likelihood of BC, post-MRI discontinuation detected tumors are prognostically worse, highlighting the need for more personalized, extended screening. KEY POINTS: Question Current regulations and duration of MRI screening do not suit the entire increased-risk population. Findings Early discontinuation disproportionately affects women with a personal or family history. Cancers detected after cessation of MRI screening seem larger and more often invasive. Clinical relevance Because certain women with a personal or family risk indication could benefit from a longer duration of MRI screening, extended, personalized screening beyond current guidelines is suggested.
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.