ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2019
Factors influencing the performance of a diagnostic model including contrast-enhanced ultrasound in 1023 breast lesions: comparison with histopathology.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography With SonoVue in the Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions: A Meta-Analysis.Technology in cancer research & treatmentPooled it
- A 2.5D multichannel deep learning model using contrast-enhanced ultrasound for predicting malignancy in breast nodules: a two-center study.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Current status and future perspectives of contrast-enhanced ultrasound diagnosis of breast lesions.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2024Review
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound to predict malignant upgrading of atypical ductal hyperplasia.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in breast lesions: what diagnostic models could be used for lesions of different sizes?Gland surgery · 2023Article
- Application of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the pathological grading and prognosis prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography in the Diagnosis and Treatment Modulation of Breast Cancer.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Accuracy of mammography and ultrasonography and their BI-RADS in detection of breast malignancy.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2021Article
- Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound area ratio in identifying benign and malignant small breast masses.Gland surgery · 2020Article
- Mammary hamartoma: is ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy sufficient for its treatment?Gland surgery · 2020Article
- Prospective evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of breast BI-RADS 3-5 lesions.BMC medical imaging · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to investigate the influence of patient and lesion characteristics on our diagnostic model for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) of the breast, comparing its accuracy with that of histopathology.
methodsConducting a study with eight medical centers, we compared 1,023 breast lesions categorized as BI-RADS 4 or 5 with the score from our newly-established CEUS-based diagnostic model, comparing the results with pathological outcomes. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the influence of clinicopathological characteristics on the performance of this CEUS model.
resultsLogistic regression analysis showed that patients' age, maximum lesion diameter, and distance from the lesion's deep edge to the pectoralis major were significant independent influencing factors. The model's diagnostic accuracy was greater for patients >35 y (P=0.005), for maximum lesion diameter >20 mm, and for distance from the lesion's deep edge to the pectoralis major ≤3.05 mm. There was no significant difference in accuracy between lesions with maximum lesion diameter 10-20 and <10 mm (P=0.393).
conclusionsThe diagnostic performance of the proposed CEUS model for breast lesions is influenced by patients' age, maximum lesion diameter, and distance from the lesion's deep edge to the pectoralis major. Consideration of influencing factors is required to optimize clinical use of the CEUS model.
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.