ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2026
Supplemental automated breast ultrasound in negative screening mammography: early-stage cancer detection in dense breasts with limited yield in non-dense breasts.
Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- BI-RADS v2025 for breast ultrasound: key updates and Asian perspectives.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2026Article
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
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the performance of supplemental automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) in women with negative screening mammographic findings and assessed its utility across clinical subgroups to inform personalized implementation strategies.
methodsWe retrospectively identified 3,417 ABUS examinations performed concurrently with mammography between January 2022 and April 2024. Examinations with negative mammographic findings were included, while those with positive mammographic findings, no workup for ABUS-positive results, or less than 12 months of follow-up were excluded. The reference standards were histopathology and 12-month follow-up outcomes. ABUS performance was evaluated overall and within subgroups stratified by age (<50 vs. ≥50 years), mammographic density (non-dense vs. dense), body mass index (<25 vs. ≥25 kg/m²), and prior ultrasound history (prevalence vs. incidence).
resultsWe analyzed 1,932 ABUS examinations from 1,597 women (mean age, 56±9 years). ABUS detected 13 cancers, yielding a detection rate of 6.7 per 1,000. Of these, 11 (84.6%) were invasive, including nine (81.8%) node-negative lesions, with a median size of 1.2 cm (range, 0.1 to 2.6 cm). One interval cancer was identified as a palpable mass 8 months after a negative ABUS examination. The abnormal interpretation rate, biopsy rate, sensitivity, and specificity were 28.0% (542/1,932), 4.0% (78/1,932), 92.9% (13/14), and 72.4% (1,389/1,918), respectively. Higher abnormal interpretation rates and lower specificity were observed among women aged <50 years, those with dense breasts, and during prevalence examinations. No cancers were detected in women with non-dense breasts.
conclusionABUS identified small, node-negative invasive cancers with likely favorable prognoses but demonstrated limited value in women with non-dense breasts, supporting its personalized use based on breast density and patient preference.
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.