Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42009667›Full record

ArticleNPJ breast cancer2026

Development and internal validation of mammography feature-based prognostic models for distant recurrence-free survival of invasive breast cancer in a screening cohort.

Jim Peters, Bas B L Penning de Vries, Jos A A M van Dijck, Ritse M Mann, Nikita Moriakov, Jonas Teuwen, Nico Karssemeijer, Esther H Lips, Jelle Wesseling, Merle M van Leeuwen and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ breast cancer, 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

18 authors.

Jim PetersDepartment IQ Health, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Jim.Peters@radboudumc.nl.
Bas B L Penning de VriesUniversity Utrecht, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jos A A M van DijckDepartment IQ Health, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Ritse M MannDepartment of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Nikita MoriakovDepartment of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jonas TeuwenDepartment of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Nico KarssemeijerDepartment of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Esther H LipsDivision of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Jelle WesselingDivision of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Merle M van LeeuwenDivision of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Alexandra W van den Belt-DuseboutDivision of Molecular Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Carla H van GilsUniversity Utrecht, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Ruud PijnappelDutch Expert Centre for Screening, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Linda de MunckDepartment of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Marja van OirsouwBorstkanker Vereniging Nederland, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Ellen VerschuurBorstkanker Vereniging Nederland, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Sjoerd G EliasUniversity Utrecht, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Mireille J M BroedersDepartment IQ Health, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

Dutch Cancer Society 11835Dutch Research Council 5550004201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening may be reduced by identifying lesions that, although detected on screening mammograms, are unlikely to progress to poor outcomes and may not require recall. As a proof-of-concept, we evaluated prognostic models for 10-year distant recurrence-free survival (DRFS) using radiomics features from invasive breast cancers (IBCs) presenting as masses on screening mammograms. In a cohort of screened women, 1466 IBC patients with clinical, pathological, and follow-up data were identified through national registries. Using radiomics features, tumor volume, and specific growth rate, proportional hazards models were developed to predict 10-year distant recurrence risk. Models were trained using positive screening mammograms of patients with screen-detected IBC (n = 1063) and diagnostic mammograms of patients with interval cancer (n = 406). Performance was evaluated only in screen-detected IBCs using repeated nested cross-validation. Median follow-up was 5.1 years (10th-90th percentile: 2.1-10.1), with 111 distant recurrences within 10 years. Model performance was moderate (C-index 0.70 [SD 0.01], calibration slope 1.22 [SD 0.13]), with predicted 10-year recurrence risks ranging from 4.9% to 18.0% (10th-90th percentile). The 42 IBCs with the lowest predicted risk had a 10-year recurrence probability of 2.6% (95% CI 0-7.5%), of whom only five received adjuvant systemic therapy. These findings suggest that mammography-based radiomics features may help identify low-risk IBCs and potentially reduce overdiagnosis by reconsidering recall for selected cases.

Identifiers

PMID42009667
PMCPMC13280345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.