Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39301453›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Vanishing Act: A Case Report of Missing Breast Tumour Marker.

Shaleene Subramaniam, Anushya Vijayananthan, Kartini Rahmat

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Shaleene SubramaniamBiomedical Imaging, University Malaya Medical Center, Kuala Lumpur, MYS.
Anushya VijayananthanBiomedical Imaging, University Malaya Medical Center, Kuala Lumpur, MYS.
Kartini RahmatBiomedical Imaging, University Malaya Medical Center, Kuala Lumpur, MYS.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Breast tissue markers are essential in localising tumours post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to breast-conserving surgery. However, due to the advancement in neoadjuvant therapies, greater efficacy in reducing tumour size increases the possibility of marker migration, potentially compromising surgical outcomes. We report a case of a 34-year-old woman with left breast invasive carcinoma, where the tissue marker, placed under ultrasound guidance before chemotherapy, migrated and was undetectable after eight chemotherapy cycles. The delay in surgery was resolved by identifying the marker in the left pectoral muscle using CT, though proximity to the lung prevented hook wire placement. Proposed migration mechanisms include the "accordion effect" and haematoma-induced displacement, highlighting the dynamic nature of breast tissue. Various imaging modalities, such as mammography, ultrasound, and CT, have proven helpful for marker localisation. This case underscores the need for a deeper understanding of tissue dynamics and emphasises interdisciplinary communication to adapt treatment strategies. As medical knowledge continues to evolve, insights are needed to refine best practices in breast cancer management and radiological interventions.

Indexed as

biopsybreast and endocrine surgerybreast cancer outcomesbreast radiologygeneral radiologygeneral surgery and breast cancermammographymriultrasound

Identifiers

PMID39301453
PMCPMC11412637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.