ArticleBMC women's health2013
The biology of malignant breast tumors has an impact on the presentation in ultrasound: an analysis of 315 cases.
Article in BMC women's health, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sonographic Correlations With Histological Grade and Biomarker Profiles in Breast Invasive Ductal Carcinoma.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Integrative multimodal ultrasound and radiomics for early prediction of neoadjuvant therapy response in breast cancer: a clinical study.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Correlation of shear-wave elastography stiffness and apparent diffusion coefficient values with tumor characteristics in breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Ultrasound radiomics-based nomogram to predict lymphovascular invasion in invasive breast cancer: a multicenter, retrospective study.European radiology · 2024Article
- Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of mathematical models in distinguishing ultrasound imaging of breast nodules.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Prediction for pathological and immunohistochemical characteristics of triple-negative invasive breast carcinomas: the performance comparison between quantitative and qualitative sonographic feature analysis.European radiology · 2022Article
- Characteristics of Breast Masses of Female Patients Referred for Diagnostic Breast Ultrasound from a Saudi Primary Health Care Setting.International journal of general medicine · 2021Article
- Ultrasonographic appearance of triple-negative invasive breast carcinoma is associated with novel molecular subtypes based on transcriptomic analysis.Annals of translational medicine · 2020Article
- Triple-negative invasive breast carcinoma: the association between the sonographic appearances with clinicopathological feature.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Article
- Heterogeneity of triple-negative breast cancer: mammographic, US, and MR imaging features according to androgen receptor expression.European radiology · 2015Article
- Computer-aided assessment of tumor grade for breast cancer in ultrasound images.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2015Article
- Pregnancy-associated breast cancer: optimal treatment options.International journal of women's health · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the relation of some ultrasound morphological parameters to biological characteristics in breast carcinoma.
methodsUltrasound data from 315 breast masses were collected. We analyzed the ultrasound features of the tumors according to the ACR BI-RADS®-US classification system stratified by hormone receptor status, HER2 status, histology grade, tumor type (ductal versus lobular), triple-negativity, breast density, tumor size, lymph node involvement and patient's age.
resultsWe found a variety of ultrasound features that varied between the groups. Invasive lobular tumors were more likely to have an angulated margin (39% versus 22%, p = 0.040) and less likely to show posterior acoustic enhancement (3% versus 16%, p = 0.023) compared to invasive ductal carcinoma. G3 tumors were linked to a higher chance of posterior acoustic enhancement and less shadowing and the margin of G3 tumors was more often described as lobulated or microlobulated compared to G1/G2 tumors (67% versus 46%, p = 0.001). Tumors with an over-expression of HER2 exhibited a higher rate of architectural distortions in the surrounding tissue, but there were no differences regarding the other features. Hormone receptor negative tumors were more likely to exhibit a lobulated or microlobulated margin (67% versus 50%, p = 0.037) and less likely to have an echogenic halo (39% versus 64%, p = 0.001). Furthermore, the posterior acoustic feature was more often described as enhancement (33% versus 13%, p = 0.001) and less often as shadowing (20% versus 47%, p < 0.001) compared to hormone receptor positive tumors.
conclusionDepending on their biological and clinical profile, breast cancers are more or less likely to exhibit the typical criteria for malignancy in ultrasound. Moreover, certain types of breast cancer tend to possess criteria that are usually associated with benign masses. False-negative diagnosis may result in serious consequences for the patient. For the sonographer it is essential to be well aware of potential variations in the ultrasound morphology of breast tumors, as described in this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.