ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2020
Giant benign phyllodes breast tumour with pulmonary nodule mimicking malignancy: A case report.
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Diagnostic difficulties in giant benign phyllodes tumor.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
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
backgroundPhyllodes tumours (PTs) are fibroepithelial breast tumours, which can be classified as benign, borderline or malignant, according to their histological characteristics. While various huge borderline or malignant PTs have been previously described, a benign PT with a pulmonary nodule mimicking malignancy has not yet been reported. In order that doctors may have a comprehensive understanding of super-giant benign PTs (≥ 20 cm), we also performed a literature review to summarize the clinical features, differential diagnosis, and treatment of this disease. CASE SUMMARY: A 42-year-old woman with severe anaemia presented with a rapidly enlarging right breast mass, measuring approximately 30 cm × 25 cm × 20 cm that was first noticed 1 year previously. A region of skin ulceration and necrosis (20 cm × 15 cm) was observed on the lateral side of the mass. Computed tomography (CT) of the chest revealed a pulmonary nodule, which initially suggested a diagnosis of metastasis. CT showed that the boundaries between the pectoralis major and the mass were blurred, which was presumed to be due to tumour invasion. However, two core needle biopsies of the mass showed no evidence of malignancy. Following these results, the tumour was removed by mastectomy of the right breast. Interestingly, postoperative pathology finally proved the diagnosis of a benign PT. After 1 year of follow-up, wedge resection of the small pulmonary nodule was performed, and it was confirmed that the lung nodule was actually adenocarcinoma rather than metastatic breast cancer. The patient recovered very well without any postoperative treatment.
conclusionThis case is unique in that the giant breast mass initially mimicking a malignant clinical presentation was eventually pathologically confirmed to be a benign PT, which misled the diagnosis and complemented the atypical features of benign PTs. The pathological and immunohistochemical results were important in the differential diagnosis. In addition, total mastectomy should be recommended due to difficulty in the precise diagnosis of PTs, especially in large breast masses. In the literature, almost one-half of super-giant benign cases were thought to be malignant tumours before surgery. This finding is a reminder to consider all conditions in order to make an accurate diagnosis and avoid excessive treatment.
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.