Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25578683›Full record

ArticleAnnals of diagnostic pathology2015

Radial scar/complex sclerosing lesions: a clinicopathologic correlation study from a single institution.

Aziza Nassar, Amy L Conners, Betul Celik, Sarah M Jenkins, Carin Y Smith, Tina J Hieken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of diagnostic pathology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Underestimation Rate in the Percutaneous Diagnosis of Radial Scar/Complex Sclerosing Lesion of the Breast: Systematic Review.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Pitfalls in breast pathology.Histopathology · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Aziza NassarDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL. Electronic address: nassar.aziza@mayo.edu.
Amy L ConnersDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Betul CelikDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.
Sarah M JenkinsDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Carin Y SmithDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Tina J HiekenDivision of Subspecialty General Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Mayo Clinic · USJacksonville College · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USMayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

Women's Cancer ProgramP30CA015083 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Felicity Enders · 1985 to 2026
$151.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA015083
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radial scars (RSs) or complex sclerosing lesions (CSLs) of the breast are benign radiologic and histologic entities. With the introduction of population-based screening programs, their incidence has increased to 0.03% to 0.09% of all core needle biopsies (CNBs). They can pose diagnostic difficulty because their radiologic and histologic appearances mimic carcinoma. We retrospectively searched for and reviewed all cases of RS/CSL diagnosed on image-guided CNB from January 1, 1994, to August 31, 2013, at a single institution. We also assessed the pathologic reports from excisional biopsies to identify cases upstaged to atypia or neoplasm. After exclusions, 100 CNBs were identified from 97 women, which showed RS/CSL without concomitant atypia. Mean age of the women was 52.9 years. Thirty-five women (38/100 CNBs, 38%) had follow-up excision. The median size of the excised RS/CSLs was 1.2 cm; 69% were larger than 1.0 cm. Almost all excised cases (92%) showed radiologic and pathologic concordance, and 79% were designated as suspicious for malignancy (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System level 4). The most common findings of 38 follow-up excisional biopsies were residual RS (22 [58%]), atypical lobular hyperplasia (5 [13%]), and no residual lesion (5 [13%]). Eleven excisional biopsies (29%) were upstaged to invasive or in situ carcinoma or to atypical hyperplasia. Follow-up excisional biopsy is warranted for RS/CSLs, specifically those larger than 1.0 cm with worrisome radiographic findings or with radiologic and pathologic discordance. Approximately 29% of cases were upstaged to in situ or invasive carcinomas or other high-risk lesions in our study.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleBreast DiseasesBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma in SituCarcinoma, LobularCicatrixDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansHyperplasiaMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrecancerous ConditionsBreast cancerCore needle biopsyExcisional biopsyRadial scarUpstage

Identifiers

PMID25578683
PMCPMC4361064
OpenAlexW2140784256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.