ReviewCureus2025
A Review of Artificial Intelligence Models for Detecting Breast Arterial Calcification on Mammograms and Their Clinical Implications.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Artificial intelligence-based quantification of breast arterial calcifications to predict cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.European heart journal · 2026Article
- Automated assessment of breast arterial calcification: a new frontier in cardiovascular risk prediction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast arterial calcification (BAC), traditionally regarded as an incidental mammogram finding, is now recognized as a clinically significant marker associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD), particularly in women. Despite this association, BAC remains underreported in clinical practice due to the lack of standardized screening protocols and the manual burden of identification. With CVD being the leading cause of mortality among women worldwide and traditional risk calculators often underestimating female cardiovascular risk, the potential of BAC as a surrogate biomarker is increasingly being explored. Mammography, already a widely used screening tool for breast cancer, offers an opportunity to identify BAC and thereby enable dual-purpose screening for both breast and cardiovascular health. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML), particularly in deep learning models such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have shown tremendous promise in detecting and quantifying BAC with high accuracy. Models such as DU-Net, difference-of-Gaussian generative adversarial network (DoG-GAN), and Simple Context U-Net (SCU-Net) utilize U-Net architectures optimized for segmentation and demonstrate performance metrics that rival or surpass human experts. Other approaches, including hybrid models, transfer learning, and ensemble methods, have also achieved strong diagnostic metrics, improving the reliability and scalability of BAC detection. This review consolidates findings from recent studies and technical innovations, evaluating various ML algorithms and their applications in automating BAC identification. In doing so, it highlights the potential of AI to address the long-standing challenge of underreporting and inconsistent quantification of BAC. The clinical implications of AI-enhanced BAC detection are significant. Accurate, automated identification of BAC can improve cardiovascular risk stratification, especially in women whose disease may otherwise go unnoticed by traditional tools. Moreover, at a population level, integrating BAC detection into routine mammogram workflows could yield substantial public health benefits, enabling earlier interventions and reducing overall healthcare costs. By consolidating current models and emphasizing the need for standardized reporting, this review aims to support the integration of AI-based BAC detection into routine clinical practice, thereby enhancing both diagnostic accuracy and preventive care for cardiovascular disease.
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.