ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2019
Atypical ductal hyperplasia and the risk of underestimation: tissue sampling method, multifocality, and associated calcification significantly influence the diagnostic upgrade rate based on subsequent surgical specimens.
Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vacuum-assisted breast biopsy vs core needle biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Potential role of breast MRI to identify patients with high-risk lesions who might avoid surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Management of high-risk (B3) breast lesions in symptomatic practice: evidence review and practical recommendations for multidisciplinary care.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2026Review
- The Complex Path from Mammary Ductal Hyperplasia to Breast Cancer: Elevated Malignancy Risk in Atypical Forms.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- High-Risk Breast Lesions on Core Biopsy: Rates of Upgrade and Management Recommendations.Surgical pathology clinics · 2025Review
- Navigating the Uncertainty of B3 Breast Lesions: Diagnostic Challenges and Evolving Management Strategies.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Lobular In Situ Neoplasm: High-Risk Lesions Challenging Breast Cancer Prevention.Cancers · 2024Article
- Review
- Third International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions).Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2023Review
- [B3 lesions of the breast: histological, clinical, and epidemiological aspects : Update].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
- Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia: Risk Factors for Predicting Pathologic Upgrade on Excisional Biopsy.Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe chi · 2022Article
- Positive predictive value for malignancy of uncertain malignant potential (B3) breast lesions diagnosed on vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB): is surgical excision still recommended?European radiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk assessment and therapeutic options are challenges when counselling patients with an atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) to undergo either open surgery or follow-up only.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed a series of ADH lesions and assessed whether the morphological parameters of the biopsy materials indicated whether the patient should undergo surgery. A total of 207 breast biopsies [56 core needle biopsies (CNBs) and 151 vacuum-assisted biopsies (VABs)] histologically diagnosed as ADH were analyzed retrospectively, together with subsequently obtained surgical specimens. All histological slides were re-analyzed with regard to the presence/absence of ADH-associated calcification, other B3 lesions (lesion of uncertain malignant potential), extent of the lesion, and the presence of multifocality.
resultsThe overall underestimation rate for the whole cohort was 39% (57% for CNB, 33% for VAB). In the univariate analysis, the method of biopsy (CNB vs VAB, p = 0.002) and presence of multifocality in VAB specimens (p = 0.0176) were significant risk factors for the underestimation of the disease (ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive cancer detected on subsequent open biopsy). In the multivariate logistic regression model, the absence of calcification (p = 0.0252) and the presence of multifocality (unifocal vs multifocal ADH, p = 0.0147) in VAB specimens were significant risk factors for underestimation.
conclusionsMultifocal ADH without associated calcification diagnosed by CNB tends to have a higher upgrade rate. Because the upgrade rate was 16.5% even in the group with the lowest risk (VAB-diagnosed unifocal ADH with calcification), we could not identify a subgroup that would not require an open biopsy.
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.