ArticleCureus2019
Influence of Tumor Subtype, Radiological Sign and Prognostic Factors on Tumor Size Discrepancies Between Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Final Histology.
Article in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Deep learning, radiomics and radiogenomics applications in the digital breast tomosynthesis: a systematic review.BMC bioinformatics · 2023Pooled it
- Concordance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Measured Tumor Size with the Pathological Gold Standard: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis by Molecular Subtype and Breast Density.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic dilemma of lobular carcinoma: a mini-review of imaging modalities and the role of artificial intelligence and radiomics.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Diagnosis of architectural distortion on digital breast tomosynthesis using radiomics and deep learning.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Update on Technology, Evidence, and Clinical Practice.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, IncArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Influence of tumor subtype, radiological sign and prognostic factors on tumor size discrepancies between DBT and final histology has not been completely investigated so far. Purpose To study the influence of tumor subtype, radiological sign and prognostic factors on tumor size discrepancies between digital breast tomosynthesis and final histology. Material and methods This is a retrospective study conducted between January 2015 and December 2016. After IRB approval, 130 consecutive patients with breast cancer diagnosed with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) were evaluated. A discrepancy between DBT and final histology was considered present if the difference was above the cut-off of 5 mm. Tumor subtype, radiological sign and prognostic factors were evaluated in patients with discrepancies. Descriptive statistic and non-parametric tests were used. Results A total of 105 cases of cancer, in 96 patients, all female, were included. Mean age was 61 years (range: 35-82 yrs). In 19 (18.1%) cases, discrepancies were found: 13 (68.4%) were underestimated by DBT. For tumor subtype, 10 (52.6%) were infiltrating lobular carcinomas (ILC) (p < 0.01). Fourteen (73.7%) discordant cases were architectural distortions (p < 0.01). Prognostic factors did not affect tumor size discrepancies. Conclusion ILC or an architectural distortion represents the majority of cases of tumor size discrepancies between DBT and final histology.
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.