Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33010022›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2021

Performance of a clinical and imaging-based multivariate model as decision support tool to help save unnecessary surgeries for high-risk breast lesions.

Dogan S Polat, Jennifer G Schopp, Firouzeh Arjmandi, Jessica Porembka, Venetia Sarode, Deborah Farr, Yin Xi, Basak E Dogan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 61% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dogan S PolatDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. dogan.polat@utsouthwestern.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7483-7485
Jennifer G SchoppDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Firouzeh ArjmandiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Jessica PorembkaDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Venetia SarodeDepartment of Pathology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Deborah FarrDepartment of Surgery, Surgical Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Yin XiDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Basak E DoganDepartment of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USSouthwestern Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the performance of an imaging and biopsy parameters-based multivariate model in decreasing unnecessary surgeries for high-risk breast lesions.

methodsIn an IRB-approved study, we retrospectively reviewed all high-risk lesions (HRL) identified at imaging-guided biopsy in our institution between July 1, 2014-July 1, 2017. Lesions were categorized high-risk-I (HR-I = atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical papillary lesion) and II (HR-II = Flat epithelial atypia, radial scar, benign papilloma). Patient risk factors, lesion features, detection and biopsy modality, excision and cancer upgrade rates were collected. Reference standard for upgrade was either excision or at least 2-year imaging follow-up. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a multivariate model using HRL type, lesion and biopsy needle size for surgical cancer upgrade with performance assessed using ROC analysis.

resultsOf 699 HRL in 652 patients, 525(75%) had reference standard available, and 48/525(9.1%) showed cancer at surgical excision. Excision (84.5% vs 51.1%) and upgrade (17.6%vs1.8%) rates were higher in HR-I compared to HR-II (p < 0.01). In HR-I, small needle size < 12G vs ≥ 12G [32.1% vs 13.2%, p < 0.01] and less cores [< 6 vs ≥ 6, 28.6%vs13.7%, p = 0.01] were significantly associated with higher cancer upgrades. Our multivariate model had an AUC = 0.87, saving 28.1% of benign surgeries with 100% sensitivity, based on HRL subtype, lesion size(mm, continuous), needle size (< 12G vs ≥ 12G) and biopsy modality (US vs MRI vs stereotactic)

conclusionOur multivariate model using lesion size, needle size and patient age had a high diagnostic performance in decreasing unnecessary surgeries and shows promise as a decision support tool.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingDecision Support Systems, ClinicalBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleBiopsy, NeedleBreastFemaleHumansImage-Guided BiopsyRetrospective StudiesAtypical ductal hyperplasiaAtypical lobular hyperplasiaAtypical papillomaBreast cancerLobular carcinoma in situ

Identifiers

PMID33010022
OpenAlexW3091148781

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.