Evidence mapPaperPMID 41360762Full record

ArticleNature communications2025

Mammo-AGE: deep learning estimation of breast age from mammograms.

Xin Wang, Tao Tan, Yuan Gao, Hong-Yu Zhou, Tianyu Zhang, Luyi Han, Antonio Portaluri, Eric Marcus, Chunyao Lu, Caroline A Drukker and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

15 authors.

Xin WangDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9619-7503
Tao TanFaculty of Applied Sciences, Macao Polytechnic University, Macao, SAR, China. taotanjs@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5403-0887
Yuan GaoDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6326-129X
Hong-Yu ZhouSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1256-7050
Tianyu ZhangDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9891-6874
Luyi HanDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4046-2763
Antonio PortaluriDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7953-8916
Eric MarcusDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Chunyao LuDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6911-4036
Caroline A DrukkerDepartment of Surgical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jonas TeuwenDepartment of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Regina Beets-TanDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Shanshan WangPaul C. Lauterbur Research Center for Biomedical Imaging, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0575-6523
Nico KarssemeijerDepartment of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Ritse MannDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8111-1930

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biological age is an important indicator of organ functions and health. Although mammograms are widely used in breast cancer screening, the potential of mammogram-based biological age predictors remains underexplored. Here, we propose a deep learning model to estimate the biological age of the breast using healthy mammograms. The model is developed on three large datasets and externally validated on two additional datasets, encompassing 95,826 mammograms from 44,497 women aged 18 to 98 years. It demonstrates accurate age estimation (mean absolute error: 4.2 - 6.1 years) with strong correlation to chronological age. Predicted breast age stratifies breast cancer risk similarly to chronological age. Occlusion analysis, employed for model interpretation, reveals the aging-related pattern of the breast. The breast age gap (the difference between system-bias-corrected breast age and chronological age) may reflect breast health status. Breast cancer patients show higher breast age gaps than the healthy population. In two longitudinal datasets, larger breast age gaps are associated with increased future breast cancer risk, with hazard ratios of 1.013 - 1.022. Furthermore, we finetune the model specifically for downstream breast cancer diagnosis and risk prediction. Our approach outperforms other comparative methods, showing its potential for supporting both early detection and personalized screening strategies.

Indexed as

AgingBreastBreast NeoplasmsDeep LearningMammographyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID41360762
PMCPMC12686398

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.