Contrast-Enhanced Mammography in Breast Cancer Follow-Up: Diagnostic Value in Suspected Recurrence.

Claudio Ventura, Marco Fogante, Nicola Carboni, Silvia Gradassi Borgoforte, Barbara Franca Simonetti, Elisabetta Marconi, Giulio Argalia

Abstract read

PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher

In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. 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

7 authors.

Claudio VenturaSOD Radiologia Materno Infantile, Senologica, Cardiologica ed Ecografica Ambulatoriale, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5070-5784

Marco FoganteSOD Radiologia Materno Infantile, Senologica, Cardiologica ed Ecografica Ambulatoriale, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2993-5718

Nicola CarboniSOD Radiologia Materno Infantile, Senologica, Cardiologica ed Ecografica Ambulatoriale, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126 Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1811-0334

Silvia Gradassi BorgoforteSOD Radiologia Materno Infantile, Senologica, Cardiologica ed Ecografica Ambulatoriale, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126 Ancona, Italy.

Barbara Franca SimonettiSOD Radiologia Materno Infantile, Senologica, Cardiologica ed Ecografica Ambulatoriale, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126 Ancona, Italy.

Elisabetta MarconiSOD Radiologia Materno Infantile, Senologica, Cardiologica ed Ecografica Ambulatoriale, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126 Ancona, Italy.

Giulio ArgaliaSOD Radiologia Materno Infantile, Senologica, Cardiologica ed Ecografica Ambulatoriale, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126 Ancona, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) are at increased risk of local recurrence or new primary tumors, which are often difficult to assess on conventional imaging because of postoperative changes. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) in women with PHBC presenting with suspicious findings on follow-up mammography or ultrasound. Sixty-two patients underwent CEM between December 2023 and June 2025. Lesions showing enhancement were biopsied, while non-enhancing ones were followed for stability. Histopathology served as the reference standard. Diagnostic performance was assessed using standard statistical methods, including sensitivity, specificity, Fisher's exact test, and ROC analysis. Among 62 lesions, 34 were enhanced on CEM; 30 of these (88.2%) were malignant, whereas 25 of 28 non-enhancing lesions (89.3%) were benign (

Indexed as

breast cancercontrast-enhanced mammographydiagnostic accuracypersonal history of breast cancerrecurrencesurveillance

Identifiers

PMID41440575

DOI10.3390/jimaging11120435

PMCPMC12734039

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.