ArticleThe British journal of radiology2024
Downgrading Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories in ultrasound using strain elastography and computer-aided diagnosis system: a multicenter, prospective study.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2024. 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.
- Impact of psychological stress on ovarian function: Insights, mechanisms and intervention strategies (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2025Review
- Ultrasound elastography: advances and challenges in early detection of breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- BI-RADS application for breast cancer screening in primary healthcare settings: assessing protocol adherence and diagnostic validity.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether adding elastography strain ratio (SR) and a deep learning based computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system to breast ultrasound (US) can help reclassify Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 3 and 4a-c categories and avoid unnecessary biopsies.
methodsThis prospective, multicentre study included 1049 masses (691 benign, 358 malignant) with assigned BI-RADS 3 and 4a-c between 2020 and 2022. CAD results was dichotomized possibly malignant vs. benign. All patients underwent SR and CAD examinations and histopathological findings were the standard of reference. Reduction of unnecessary biopsies (biopsies in benign lesions) and missed malignancies after reclassified (new BI-RADS 3) with SR and CAD were the outcome measures.
resultsFollowing the routine conventional breast US assessment, 48.6% (336 of 691 masses) underwent unnecessary biopsies. After reclassifying BI-RADS 4a masses (SR cut-off <2.90, CAD dichotomized possibly benign), 25.62% (177 of 691 masses) underwent an unnecessary biopsies corresponding to a 50.14% (177 vs. 355) reduction of unnecessary biopsies. After reclassification, only 1.72% (9 of 523 masses) malignancies were missed in the new BI-RADS 3 group.
conclusionAdding SR and CAD to clinical practice may show an optimal performance in reclassifying BI-RADS 4a to 3 categories, and 50.14% masses would be benefit by keeping the rate of undetected malignancies with an acceptable value of 1.72%. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Leveraging the potential of SR in conjunction with CAD holds immense promise in substantially reducing the biopsy frequency associated with BI-RADS 3 and 4A lesions, thereby conferring substantial advantages upon patients encompassed within this cohort.
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.