Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31773458›Full record

ArticleLa Radiologia medica2019

Preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM).

Francesco Amato, Giulia Bicchierai, Donatello Cirone, Catherine Depretto, Federica Di Naro, Ermanno Vanzi, Gianfranco Scaperrotta, Tommaso Vincenzo Bartolotta, Vittorio Miele, Jacopo Nori

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in La Radiologia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. A Review of Breast Imaging for Timely Diagnosis of Disease.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Francesco AmatoDepartment of Radiology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Giulia BicchieraiDiagnostic Senology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Largo G. A. Brambilla 3, 50134, Florence, Italy. giulia.bicchierai@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1979-7593
Donatello CironeGeneral Management Staff, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Catherine DeprettoBreast Imaging Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Federica Di NaroDiagnostic Senology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Largo G. A. Brambilla 3, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Ermanno VanziDiagnostic Senology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Largo G. A. Brambilla 3, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Gianfranco ScaperrottaBreast Imaging Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Tommaso Vincenzo BartolottaDepartment of Radiology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.
Vittorio MieleDepartment of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Jacopo NoriDiagnostic Senology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Largo G. A. Brambilla 3, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi · ITFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITUniversity of Palermo · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of our study was to assess the performance of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) in the preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) patients, about the valuation of the extension of disease and in measurement of lesions. Then, we selected retrospectively, among the 1500 patients underwent to CEDM at the Breast Diagnostics Department of the Careggi University Hospital of Florence and the National Cancer Institute of Milan from September 2016 to November 2018, 31 women (mean age 57.1 aa; range 41-78 aa) with a definitive histological diagnosis of ILC. CEDM has proved to be a promising imaging technique, being characterized by a sensitivity of 100% in the detection of the index lesion, and of 84.2% in identifying any adjunctive lesions: It was the presence of a non-mass enhancement (NME) to lower the sensitivity of the technique (25% vs. 100% for mass-like enhancements or a mass closely associated with a NME). Specificity in the characterization of additional lesions was 66.7%, and the diagnosis of the extension of disease was correct in 77.4% of cases: NME also led to a decrease in diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of disease extension up to 40% versus 85% for masses and 80% for masses associated with NME (M/NME). Moreover, in 12/31 (38.7%), CEDM allowed to correctly identify lesions not shown by mammography + ultrasonography + tomosynthesis: In the half of these (6/12), there was a multicentricity, thus allowing an adequate surgical planning change. CEDM was also very accurate in analyzing the maximum diameter of the masses, while it was much less reliable in the case of the M/NME and pure NME. In conclusion, CEDM is a new promising imaging technique in the loco-regional preoperative staging and in the evaluation of disease extension for ILC, especially in case of mass enhancement lesions.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, LobularFemaleHumansIohexolMammographyMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPreoperative CareRadiographic Image EnhancementReference StandardsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityContrast MediaIohexoliopromideBreastBreast cancer stagingContrast-enhanced digital mammographyContrast-enhanced spectral mammographyInvasive lobular breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID31773458
OpenAlexW2991293015

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.