ArticleActa radiologica open2021
Validity of negative bone biopsy in suspicious bone lesions.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Schmorl's Node Mimicking Spinal Metastatic Disease: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.Cureus · 2024Article
- Safety and histopathologic yield of percutaneous CT-guided biopsies of the skull base, orbit, and calvarium.Neuroradiology · 2024Review
- Benign incidental do-not-touch bone lesions.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Influence of Prior Imaging Information on Diagnostic Accuracy for Focal Skeletal Processes-A Retrospective Analysis of the Consistency between Biopsy-Verified Imaging Diagnoses.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe presence of malignant cells in bone biopsies is considered gold standard to verify occurrence of cancer, whereas a negative bone biopsy can represent a false negative, with a risk of increasing patient morbidity and mortality and creating misleading conclusions in cancer research. However, a paucity of literature documents the validity of negative bone biopsy as an exclusion criterion for the presence of skeletal malignancies. PURPOSE: To investigate the validity of a negative bone biopsy in bone lesions suspicious of malignancy. MATERIAL AND
methodA retrospective cohort of 215 consecutive targeted non-malignant skeletal biopsies from 207 patients (43% women, 57% men, median age 64, and range 94) representing suspicious focal bone lesions, collected from January 1, 2011, to July 31, 2013, was followed over a 2-year period to examine any additional biopsy, imaging, and clinical follow-up information to categorize the original biopsy as truly benign, malignant, or equivocal. Standard deviations and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.
results210 of 215 biopsies (98%; 95% CI 0.94-0.99) showed to be truly benign 2 years after initial biopsy. Two biopsies were false negatives (1%; 95% CI 0.001-0.03), and three were equivocal (lack of imaging description).
conclusionOur study documents negative bone biopsy as a valid criterion for the absence of bone metastasis. Since only 28% had a confirmed diagnosis of prior cancer and not all patients received adequately sensitive imaging, our results might not be applicable to all cancer patients with suspicious bone lesions.
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.