ReviewCureus2025
The Association Between Breast Arterial Calcification and Subsequent Coronary Artery Calcification: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of mortality globally. While coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring is the current gold standard for detecting subclinical atherosclerosis, recent research has highlighted breast arterial calcification (BAC), often incidentally identified on screening mammograms, as a potential non-invasive marker of CVD risk. BAC has been significantly associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, peripheral vascular disease, and heart failure. This systematic review comprises 14 studies aimed at better understanding the association between the presence of BAC and CAC. The studies consisted of 5,249 women who underwent both BAC and CAC scoring, primarily post-menopausal, with an average age of 57.8 years. The time interval between BAC and CAC assessment ranged from same-day imaging to 2.94 years (mean: 16.2 months; median: 12 months). Across all studies, a consistent positive correlation was observed between the presence of BAC and CAC. Notably, women with both BAC and CAC tended to be older and exhibited a higher burden of coronary artery stenosis, an increased number of affected vessels, and more extensive calcification distribution. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of BAC for detecting CAC were 38.9%, 88%, 73%, and 57.2%, respectively. These findings suggest that the presence of BAC may serve as a useful tool for supporting the presence of CAC in at-risk patients. Given its accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and high specificity, BAC holds promise as a screening adjunct for early CVD detection in women. Standardized guidelines are needed to support radiologists in the consistent reporting of BAC on mammograms and to inform primary care providers on appropriate follow-up and cardiovascular screening for patients with positive BAC findings.
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.