ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Imaging Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in the Era of De-Escalation: Role, Limits, and Clinical Implications for Risk-Adapted Management.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The widespread implementation of population-based mammographic screening has markedly increased the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), without a proportional reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality. This divergence has intensified concerns regarding overdiagnosis and overtreatment and has prompted increasing interest in treatment de-escalation and active surveillance strategies. Breast imaging remains indispensable for DCIS detection, extent assessment, and longitudinal monitoring. However, although imaging features correlate with histopathologic risk factors at the population level, their ability to predict individual biological progression is inherently probabilistic and limited. Overinterpretation of imaging phenotypes as surrogates of invasive destiny risks inappropriate reassurance or unjustified therapeutic escalation, particularly in the context of high-sensitivity modalities that may overestimate disease extent or trigger additional interventions without proven outcome benefits. This review examines the modality-specific roles of mammography, ultrasound, breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), and emerging artificial intelligence (AI) approaches within contemporary DCIS management, with particular attention to their implementation in active surveillance trials such as LORIS, COMET, LORD, and LORETTA. Across modalities, imaging primarily reflects lesion morphology, spatial distribution, and vascular behaviour, and functions most reliably as a risk-filtering and safety-gating instrument aimed at excluding radiologically unsafe scenarios, including occult invasion, underestimated disease extent, or imaging evolution incompatible with continued observation. By delineating both the capabilities and the epistemological limits of imaging, this review proposes a structured clinical decision framework in which imaging supports-but does not independently determine-risk-adapted management. Disciplined integration of imaging into multidisciplinary decision-making is essential to enable safe de-escalation, prevent false reassurance, and align DCIS care with patient-centred and value-based principles.
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.