N/A N=969 Molecular Breast Imaging as a Screening Tool for Women With Dense Breasts
Breast Cancer
Primary: Diagnostic Yield — 3.2; 9.6; 10.7 cancers per 1000 women screened — p=.016
Clinical Trial Search
Completed trials with posted results — search by concept, filter by the parameters that matter at the bedside.
N/A N=1,638 Low Dose Molecular Breast Imaging as a Screening Tool for Women With Dense Breasts
Breast Cancer
Primary: Cancer Detection Rate Per 1000 Women Screened, by Breast Density — 3.2; 12.0; 10.7; 0 cancers per 1000 women screened — p=<0.001
N/A N=2,978 Molecular Breast Imaging and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in Screening Patients With Dense Breast Tissue
Breast Carcinoma
Primary: Rate of Detection of Invasive Cancers — 9; 14 Participants
N/A N=1,704 Radiologic Evaluation and Breast Density (READ)
Breast Cancer
Primary: Mammogram Recall for Additional Imaging — 11.3; 12.3; 9.8 percentage of women recalled
N/A N=507 Study Evaluating Changes In Mammographic Breast Density
Osteoporosis
Primary: Percent Change From Baseline in Mammographic Breast Density at Month 24 — -0.39; -0.05; -0.23; -0.42 percent change
N/A N=128 Study of Dual-energy (DE) Contrast-enhanced (CE) Digital Mammography
Breast Cancer
Primary: Percent Accuracy of Contrast Mammography — 100; 67 percentage of accuracy
N/A N=1,377 Behavioral and Psychological Impact of Returning Breast Density Results to Latinas
Breast Cancer
Primary: Knowledge of Breast Density as a Masking Factor at First Follow-up — 101; 104; 100 Participants — p=> 0.05
Phase 2 N=30 Denosumab and MRI Breast Imaging
Breast Cancer
Primary: Relative Change of ≥ 5% in Breast Density at 6 Months — 13; 8; 4 Participants — p=0.026
N/A N=6,266 Assessment of Periodic Screening of Women With Denser Breast Using WBUS and DBT
Breast Cancer
Primary: Cancer Yield Per 1,000 — 5.0; 6.3; 4.9; 5.9 Cancer yield per 1,000 — p=0.005
N/A N=995 ENGAGED 2 Study: Experiences With Mammography Screening and Breast Density 2
Breast Density · Breast Cancer Female
Primary: Number of Participants Taking Chemoprevention at 12 Months — 1; 1 Participants
N/A N=1,232 Acquisition of Breast Mammography Images
Breast Cancer
Primary: Number of Participants for Whom Study Image Data Were Collected — 642; 124; 244 Participants
N/A N=107 Image Evaluation of Philips Philips MammoDiagnost DR Full Field Digital Mammography System (FFDM)
Breast Cancer
Primary: FFDM (Full Field Digital Mammography) Mammogram Scores — 12; 0 FFDM Mammogram set
N/A N=517 KEEPS Mammographic Density And Breast Health Ancillary Study
Mammographic Density · Abnormal Mammogram
Primary: BIRADS Breast Density — 9; 9; 15; 42 participants
N/A N=24 Image Quality Assessment for Screening and Diagnostic Mammography
Breast Health
Primary: Number of Participants With Acceptable Overall Clinical Image Quality — 14; 9 Participants
N/A N=1,085 Assessment of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) in the Screening Environment
Breast Abnormalities
Primary: Number of Participants Without Cancer Who Were Recalled — 274 participants
N/A N=558 Comparison of Full-Field Digital Mammography With Digital Breast Tomography for Screening Call-Back Rates
Breast Neoplasms
Primary: Recall Rate in Group A Participants — 29; 34; 472; 467 Participants — p=0.46
N/A N=764 Evaluation of the Efficacy of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Imaging
Breast Cancer
Primary: Efficacy Based on the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve in Breasts Analyzed With DBT as an Adjunct to FFDM vs. FFDM Alone — 0.8527; 0.7516…
N/A N=100 Pilot Mammography Reader Study to Assess Breast Cancer Detection in FFDM Plus DBT Versus FFDM Alone
Breast Cancer
Primary: Compare Per Subject Area Under Curve (AUC): FFDM Only vs DBT Plus FFDM — 100; 100 Probability
Phase 2 N=42 Karolinska Interventional Study of Mammograhic Density (Karisma-1)
Breast Cancer · Mammographic Density
Primary: Mammographic Breast Density — -3.3; -2.5 percentage of breast area
N/A N=89 Comparison of MRI and Molecular Breast Imaging in Breast Diagnostic Evaluation
Breast Cancer
Primary: Sensitivity on the Per Patient Level — 25; 27 participants
Phase 3 N=51 Olive Oil for High Risk Breast Cancer Prevention in Women
Breast Cancer
Primary: Change in Maximum Volumetric Breast Density Percentage — -0.038 Mean decrease in max VBD percentage
N/A N=45 ARFI, VisR and DDAI Ultrasound for Improving Discrimination of Malignant and Unresponsive Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer
Primary: Correlation of Peak Displacement (PD) for Detecting Malignancy — 4.5803; 8.628 microns — p=0.2988
N/A N=60 The Assessment of Molecular Breast Imaging (MBI) in Distinguishing Benign From Malignant Breast Disease
Breast Abnormalities
Primary: Specificity of MBI. Specificity is Defined as the Number of True Negatives/ Total Number of Negative Pathology Results. — 27 lesions
N/A N=496 Breast Cancer Detection: Comparison of Breast Tomosynthesis and Conventional Mammography
Breast Cancer
Primary: Detection of Breast Cancer (Sensitivity)
N/A N=28 Novel MRI Sequence MR Fingerprinting in Breast MRI Feasibility Study
Breast Screening
Primary: Ratio of Intensity Score of Normal Breast Tissue for Left Breast Tissue Compared to Right for T1 Imaging Sequence — 1.07 ratio
N/A N=29,453 The Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Trial in Bergen
Breast Neoplasms
Primary: Number of Participants With Screen-Detected Breast Cancer — 95; 87 Participants
N/A N=82 Evaluation of Half-Dose Molecular Breast Imaging With Wide Beam Reconstruction Processing
Breast Cancer
Primary: Compare the Diagnostic Accuracy of 8 mCi Molecular Breast Imaging (MBI) With 4 mCi MBI. — 30; 29 cancers detected
N/A N=100 Fujifilm DBT Plus S-View Versus FFDM Alone in the Detection of Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer
Primary: Compare Per Subject Average Area Under the ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) Curve (AUC) — 0.819; 0.796 Probability — p=<0.01
Phase 2 N=158 Afimoxifene in Reducing the Risk of Breast Cancer in Women With Mammographically Dense Breast
Mammographically Dense Breast
Primary: Mammographic Breast Density Using Cumulus Software — -6.30; -5.77; -2.81; -5.43 Percent Change in Breast Density
N/A N=23 Computed Tomography Versus Standard 2D Mammography Versus 3D Tomosynthesis
Breast Cancer
Primary: Beta of CT Coronal View — 1.75 power-law slope(B)