Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 339

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multicenter Comparative Multimodality Surveillance of Women at Genetic-Familial High Risk for Breast Cancer (HIBCRIT Study): Interim Results

Open access
Sardanelli, Francesco, Podo, Franca, D'Agnolo, Giuliano, Verdecchia, Arduino, Santaquilani, Mariano, Musumeci, Renato, Trecate, Giovanna, Manoukian, Siranoush, Morassut, Sandro, de Giacomi, Clelia, Federico, Massimo, Cortesi, Laura, Corcione, Stefano, Cirillo, Stefano, Marra, Vincenzo·2007·Radiology

Abstract

Purpose: To prospectively compare clinical breast examination (CBE), mammography, ultrasonography (US), and contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for screening women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer and report interim results, with pathologic findings as standard. Materials and Methods: Institutional review board of each center approved the research; informed written consent was obtained. CBE, mammography, US, and MR imaging were performed for yearly screening of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, first-degree relatives of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, or women enrolled because of a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer (three or more events in first- or second-degree relatives in either maternal or paternal line; these included breast cancer in women younger than 60 years, ovarian cancer at any age, and male breast cancer at any age). Results: Two hundred seventy-eight women (mean age, 46 years ± 12 [standard deviation]) were enrolled. Breast cancer was found in 11 of 278 women at first round and seven of 99 at second round (14 invasive, four intraductal; eight were ≤10 mm in diameter). Detection rate per year was 4.8% (18 of 377) overall; 4.3% (11 of 258) in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers and first-degree relatives of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers versus 5.9% (seven of 119) in women enrolled because of strong family history; and 5.3% (nine of 169) in women with previous personal breast and/or ovarian cancer versus 4.3% (nine of 208) in those without. In six (33%) of 18 patients, cancer was detected only with MR imaging. Sensitivity was as follows: CBE, 50% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 29%, 71%); mammography, 59% (95% CI: 36%, 78%); US, 65% (95% CI: 41%, 83%); and MR imaging, 94% (95% CI: 82%, 99%). Positive predictive value was as follows: CBE, 82% (95% CI: 52%, 95%); mammography, 77% (95% CI: 50%, 92%); US, 65% (95% CI: 41%, 83%); and MR imaging, 63% (95% CI: 43%, 79%). Conclusion: Addition of MR imaging to the screening regimen for high-risk women may enable detection of otherwise unsuspected breast cancers. © RSNA, 2007

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2423051965

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 339

Metadata

Authors
Sardanelli, F., Podo, F., D'Agnolo, G., Verdecchia, A., Santaquilani, M., Musumeci, R., Trecate, G., Manoukian, S., Morassut, S., de Giacomi, C., Federico, M., Cortesi, L., Corcione, S., Cirillo, S., & Marra, V.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2007-03
Volume
242
Issue
3
Pages
698-715
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2150064779
Cited by
339
References
1
FWCI
20.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multicenter Comparative Multimodality Surveillance of Women at Genetic-Familial High Risk for Breast Cancer (HIBCRIT Study): Interim Results. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2423051965
The paper
Sardanelli, F., Podo, F., D'Agnolo, G., Verdecchia, A., Santaquilani, M., Musumeci, R., Trecate, G., Manoukian, S., Morassut, S., de Giacomi, C., Federico, M., Cortesi, L., Corcione, S., Cirillo, S., & Marra, V. (2007). Multicenter Comparative Multimodality Surveillance of Women at Genetic-Familial High Risk for Breast Cancer (HIBCRIT Study): Interim Results. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2423051965

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.