Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40762915›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Racial Differences in Screening Eligibility by Breast Density After State-Level Insurance Expansion.

Mattia A Mahmoud, Sarah Ehsan, Sara P Ginzberg, Susan M Domchek, Katherine L Nathanson, Emily F Conant, Despina Kontos, Jinbo Chen, Christine E Edmonds, Oluwadamilola M Fayanju and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Mattia A MahmoudDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, & Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Sarah EhsanDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, & Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Sara P GinzbergDepartment of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Susan M DomchekDepartment of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Katherine L NathansonDepartment of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Emily F ConantAbramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Despina KontosDepartment of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Jinbo ChenDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, & Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Christine E EdmondsAbramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Oluwadamilola M FayanjuDepartment of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Anne Marie McCarthyDepartment of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, & Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Women with dense breasts have elevated risk of false-negative mammograms and may benefit from supplemental screening. Objective: To assess potential outcomes of Pennsylvania's law mandating insurance coverage for supplemental breast cancer screening among Black and White women. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included Black and White women, aged 40 to 74 years, without prior breast cancer or known BRCA1/2 variants who underwent mammography screening at a large urban academic health system from January 2015 to December 2021, with cancer outcomes ascertained through December 2022. Data analysis was conducted from June 2023 to April 2025. Exposures: Dense breasts; the law mandates insurance coverage for women with extremely dense breasts or those with heterogeneously dense breasts plus a greater than 20% lifetime breast cancer risk by risk models. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were odds of eligibility for supplemental coverage and of a false-negative mammogram. Results: A total of 68 478 women (38 397 Black women [median (IQR) age, 57 (49-64) years] and 30 081 White women [median (IQR) age, 58 (49-65) years]) were used for the analysis. Fewer Black women had extremely dense breasts (561 [2.1%] vs 1464 [5.8%]; P = .02) and greater than 20% lifetime risk of breast cancer identified (257 [0.7%] vs 1905 [6.4%]; P = .04) compared with White women. Consequently, Black women were less likely to meet the eligibility criteria for supplemental screening (523 [1.6%] vs 2081 [8.4%]; P = .02). The criteria showed lower sensitivity but higher specificity for detecting false-negative mammograms in Black compared with White women in one round of screening. Using heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts alone would detect more false negatives but with significantly more women recommended for magnetic resonance imaging. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of 68 478 screening mammograms among Black and White women from 2015 to 2021, retrospectively applying criteria for supplemental screening based on heterogeneously or extremely dense breast density and lifetime risk had limited ability to identify women at risk for a false-negative mammogram. Given lower density and lifetime risk estimates, few Black women met criteria for insurance coverage in Pennsylvania, and the criteria had poor sensitivity for identifying Black women with false-negative mammograms. Additionally, using the current breast density criteria for magnetic resonance imaging may not accurately reflect breast cancer risk in Black women.

Indexed as

Black or African AmericanBreast DensityBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerInsurance CoverageMammographyWhiteAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPennsylvania

Identifiers

PMID40762915
PMCPMC12326280

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.