ArticleLa Radiologia medica2021
The role of rare breast cancers in the false negative strain elastography results.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimodal ultrasound deep learning to detect fibrosis in early chronic kidney disease.Renal failure · 2024Article
- Downgrading Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories in ultrasound using strain elastography and computer-aided diagnosis system: a multicenter, prospective study.The British journal of radiology · 2024Article
- Recent Advances in Ultrasound Breast Imaging: From Industry to Clinical Practice.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Diagnostic performance of 2D-shear wave elastography in the diagnosis of breast cancer: a clinical appraisal of cutoff values.La Radiologia medica · 2022Article
- Comparison between two packages for pectoral muscle removal on mammographic images.La Radiologia medica · 2022Article
- Radiomics as a New Frontier of Imaging for Cancer Prognosis: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeElastography was primarily used as an adjunctive method along with ultrasonography in differentiation between benign from malignant lesions. Occasionally, overlaps can occur which are caused by some rare invasive breast cancers. Our aim is to analyze the role of rare breast cancers in false negative strain elastography results and to assess the relation among false negative results and tumor size, lesion distance to skin, and tumor grade.
methodsPatients with BI-RADS 5 category underwent strain elastography and core biopsy. All those with confirmed invasive breast cancer were included. For each rare breast cancer, four usual invasive breast cancer cases were taken as a control group. The cut-off value of strain ratio was considered as 2.3. The true positive and the false negative groups were compared in terms of histological type (rare carcinomas and the others) and the other parameters. Pearson Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used for statistical analyses. P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
resultsOne hundred-thirteen patients were defined as true positive (70.6%), and 47 patients were defined as false negative (29.4%). Strain ratio values of the rare breast cancers were significantly lower than those of the other breast cancers (p = 0.012). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups with respect to tumor size, distance to skin, and tumor grade (p > 0.05).
conclusionThe rare breast cancers are an important cause of false negativity in elastographic evaluation of invasive breast cancers. The results should be interpreted in combination with grayscale US findings.
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.