ArticleCytoJournal2021
The International Academy of Cytology standardized reporting of breast fine-needle aspiration biopsy cytology: A 2 year's retrospective study with application of categories and their assessment for risk of malignancy.
Article in CytoJournal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Use of the International Academy of Cytology Yokohama System for Reporting Breast Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy.American journal of clinical pathology · 2023Pooled it
- Explainable machine learning for breast cancer prediction in resource-constrained settings: A multi-algorithmic framework integrating shap-based transparency with clinical decision support.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of the Yokohama system for reporting breast fine-needle aspiration cytology and breast imaging-reporting and data system in breast lesions.CytoJournal · 2026Article
- Breast fine-needle aspiration cytology in the era of core-needle biopsy: what is its role?Journal of pathology and translational medicine · 2025Review
- Agreement among Observers with Variable Experience in the Implementation of the Yokohama System for Reporting Breast Fine Needle Aspiration Biopsy Cytopathology.Journal of cytologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesBreast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide. The fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) may be used as the first-line pathological investigation for evaluation and early diagnosis of the breast lesion. The FNAB helps to differentiate malignant from benign lesions. In the present study, we categorized the breast FNAB cases according to the International Academy of Cytology Yokohama System (IACYS) for reporting breast FNAB cytology and to assess the risk of malignancy (ROM) for each category. MATERIAL AND
methodsA retrospective data of breast lesions were retrieved from the archives of pathology department between January 2018 and December 2019. The study got approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee. Only 123 cases with cytology and histopathological correlation were included in this study. The cytological category was given according to IACYS for reporting breast FNAB cytology.
resultsThe FNAB results were include as insufficient material 3.25% (4/123), benign 46.34% (57/123), atypical 12.2% (15/123), suspicious for malignancy (SM) 4.88% (6/123), and malignant 33.33% (41/123). The ROM was 50%, 7.27%, 40.0%, 83.33%, and 97.5% for NS, benign, atypical, SM, and malignant, respectively.
conclusionFNAB is an important tool in the diagnosis and management of breast lesions, especially in financial constrained developing countries like India with limited resources, where practice of core needle biopsy is limited. The 5-tier IACYS for reporting breast FNAB improves the reproducibility of cytology reports across the world and helps in triaging the breast lesion 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.