Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28368663›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of radiology2017

Imaging features and conspicuity of invasive lobular carcinomas on digital breast tomosynthesis.

Foucauld Chamming's, Ellen Kao, Ann Aldis, Romuald Ferré, Atilla Omeroglu, Caroline Reinhold, Benoit Mesurolle

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Update on Technology, Evidence, and Clinical Practice.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Foucauld Chamming's1 Radiology Department, McGill University Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Ellen Kao1 Radiology Department, McGill University Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Ann Aldis1 Radiology Department, McGill University Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Romuald Ferré1 Radiology Department, McGill University Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Atilla Omeroglu2 Pathology Department, McGill University Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Caroline Reinhold1 Radiology Department, McGill University Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Benoit Mesurolle1 Radiology Department, McGill University Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
McGill University Health Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review the imaging features of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) seen on digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) in comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), and to evaluate whether DBT could improve conspicuity and tumour size assessment of ILC in comparison with digital mammography (DM).

methodsInstitutional review board with waiver of informed consent was obtained for this retrospective study. Patients with ILC or IDC who underwent DBT and DM at the time of diagnosis were included. DM and DBT images were reviewed in consensus by two breast radiologists in order to assess imaging features, conspicuity and maximum tumour diameter of ILC and IDC. Pathology on the surgical specimen was considered the standard of reference for assessment of tumour size.

results43 patients (20 patients with ILC and 23 patients with IDC) were included. On DBT, compared with IDC, ILC presented less frequently as masses (40% vs 78%) (p = 0.01) and more frequently as isolated distortion (20% vs 0%) (p = 0.03). ILC presented more often as asymmetries (60%) than masses (20%) on DM (p = 0.02) but not on DBT (35% vs 40%; p = 1.00). Conspicuity of ILC was significantly higher on DBT than on DM (p = 0.002), while the difference between the two techniques was not significant for IDC (p = 0.2). Regarding ILC, concordance in tumour size measurement between DBT and pathology was fair (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.24).

conclusionILC rarely presented as dense masses but frequently demonstrated architectural distortion on DBT. DBT increased lesion conspicuity but failed to accurately assess tumour size of ILC. Advances in knowledge: (1) This study describes specific features of ILC on DBT. (2) It shows that DBT can improve conspicuity of ILC.

Indexed as

MammographyBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, LobularFemaleHumansNeoplasm InvasivenessRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID28368663
PMCPMC5605116
OpenAlexW2604629495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.