Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41824206›Full record

ArticleJournal of ultrasound2026

Additional ultrasound in women with dense breasts in a breast cancer-screening program based on digital breast tomosynthesis: evidences on cancer detection, false positives and associated costs.

Giovanna Romanucci, Marco Conti, Delia Moretti, Francesca Fornasa, Claudia Rossati, Lisa Zantedeschi, Oscar Tommasini, Paolo Belli, Rossella Rella

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ultrasound, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Giovanna RomanucciUOSD Breast Unit ULSS9, Ospedale Di Marzana, Piazzale Lambranzi, 1, 37142, Verona, Italy. giovanna.romanucci@aulss9.veneto.it.
Marco ContiUOC Diagnostica Per Immagini, Ospedale G. B. Grassi, Via Gian Carlo Passeroni, 28, 00122, Rome, Italy.
Delia MorettiFacoltà Di Medicina E Chirurgia, Università Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Largo F. Vito 1, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Francesca FornasaUOSD Breast Unit ULSS9, Ospedale Di Marzana, Piazzale Lambranzi, 1, 37142, Verona, Italy.
Claudia RossatiUOSD Breast Unit ULSS9, Ospedale Di Marzana, Piazzale Lambranzi, 1, 37142, Verona, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-1238-3091
Lisa ZantedeschiUOSD Breast Unit ULSS9, Ospedale Di Marzana, Piazzale Lambranzi, 1, 37142, Verona, Italy.
Oscar TommasiniUOC Diagnostica Per Immagini, Ospedale G. B. Grassi, Via Gian Carlo Passeroni, 28, 00122, Rome, Italy.
Paolo BelliUOC Di Radiologia Toracica E Cardiovascolare, Dipartimento Di Diagnostica Per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica Ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Largo A. Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy.
Rossella RellaUOC Diagnostica Per Immagini, Ospedale G. B. Grassi, Via Gian Carlo Passeroni, 28, 00122, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast density is associated with increased risk of breast cancer (BC) and reduces mammography performance. Supplemental ultrasound (US) improves the performance of mammography screening programs in women with dense breasts but only few evidences are available about its added value when digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening is performed. Our study evaluated the contribution of US in detecting BC in women with dense breasts in a screening program based on DBT. From February 2022 to October 2023, asymptomatic women (age range, 50-69 years) attending BC Screening in Verona, Italy, were prospectively recruited. Women underwent DBT and automatic breast density evaluation. Participants with negative DBT and dense breasts were invited to additional breast US. 785/12351 (6.3%) consecutive eligible women had dense breasts. BC was suspected on the basis of DBT in 106/785 (13.5%) women and 5 cancers were diagnosed [cancer detection rate (CDR) for DBT = 6.37 per 1000 screens]. 584/679 (86.0%) DBT-negative patients agreed to US and the incremental CDR of US was 1.7 per 1000 women (1/584). US caused additional investigations in 6/584 (1.03%) women (6 core biopsies) with a benign result in 5/584 (0.86%). The cost per each additional cancer detected by US only was € 25,961,95. In conclusion, in a DBT-based screening setting, the benefit of adding US for women with dense breasts is limited and entails substantial costs.

Indexed as

Breast DensityBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerMammographyUltrasonography, MammaryAgedBreastFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansItalyMass ScreeningMiddle AgedProspective StudiesBreast cancer screeningBreast densityDigital breast tomosynthesisSupplemental ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID41824206
PMCPMC13249978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.