ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2021
The evaluation of breast findings detected through different visualisation techniques in acromegaly patients — a retrospective study
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer screening in patients with acromegaly: a plea for a personalized approach and international registries.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2025Review
- Increased risk of breast cancer among premenopausal women with pituitary gland disorders in Taiwan: a population-based matched-cohort study.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2025Article
- Prevalence of Neoplasms in Patients with Acromegaly-A Single-Center Polish Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: It is known that the increased growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) have mitogenic and antiapoptotic properties in breast cells in acromegaly. Our study aims to evaluate breast findings in patients with acromegaly by comparing them to the control group. Materials and methods: Sixty-one patients followed with acromegaly diagnosis and 180 healthy controls were included in our study. Demographic data, laboratory results, Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) scores, and breast density evaluated via mammography, malign and benign breast lesions evaluated via mammography, breast ultrasonography (USG), and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of patients were compared to the control group. Results: While BI-RADS scores were similar in patient and control groups, breast density in acromegaly patients was found out to be higher compared to the control group (p = 0.754, p = 0.001, respectively). In acromegaly patients, the breast calcification rate was higher than controls (p = 0.021). t was observed that mass frequency in USG in acromegaly patients increased when GH level increased as well (p = 0.021). No difference was detected between benign and malign breast lesions diagnosed histopathologically ( p = 0.031, p = 0.573, respectively). There was not any difference in terms of BI-RADS scores, breast types, and breast lesions in acromegaly patients that were in remission and not in remission (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Benign and malign breast lesions were found out to be similar to the control group, although breast density rate was detected to be higher in acromegaly patients. A regular follow-up is required in these patients via suitable breast visualization techniques considering their age and clinical status due to mass formation risk derived from increased GH level and extreme breast density despite the absence of any detected breast lesion frequency in acromegaly patients.
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.