ArticleCureus2024
Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation: Is There an Association Between Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Imaging Features and Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer?
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Deep Learning-Derived Malignancy Scoring in Breast Cancer Molecular Subtype Assessment.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Contrast-enhanced mammography for breast cancer detection and diagnosis with high concentration iodinated contrast medium.Insights into imaging · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to assess the correlation between imaging features of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and molecular subtypes of breast cancer.
methodsThis is a retrospective single-institution study of patients who underwent CEM from December 2019 to August 2023. Each patient had at least one histologically proven invasive breast cancer with a core biopsy performed. Patients with a history of breast cancer treatment and lesions not entirely included in the CEM images were excluded. The images were interpreted using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (ACR BI-RADS) lexicon for CEM, published in 2022. Different imaging features, including the presence of calcifications, architectural distortion, non-mass enhancement, mass morphology, internal enhancement pattern, the extent of enhancement, and lesion conspicuity, were analyzed. The molecular subtypes were studied as dichotomous variables, including luminal A, luminal B, HER2, and basal-like. The association between the imaging features and molecular subtypes was analyzed with a Fisher's exact test. Statistical significance was assumed when the p-value was <0.05.
resultsA total of 31 patients with 36 malignant lesions were included in this study. Sixteen lesions (44.4%) were luminal A, four lesions (11.1%) were luminal B, 10 lesions (27.8%) were HER2, and six (16.7%) were basal-like subtypes. The presence of calcifications was associated with the HER2 subtype (p=0.024). Rim-enhancement on recombined images was associated with a basal-like subtype (p=0.001). Heterogeneous enhancement on recombined images was associated with non-basal-like breast cancer (p=0.027). No statistically significant correlation was found between other analyzed CEM imaging features and molecular subtypes.
conclusionCEM imaging features, including the presence of calcifications and certain internal enhancement patterns, were correlated with distinguishing breast cancer molecular subtypes and thus may further expand the role of CEM.
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.