ArticleCancer management and research2024
Comparison of MRI and Ultrasound for Evaluation of Axillary Lymph Node Status in Early Breast Cancer.
Article in Cancer management and research, 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.
- Diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastasis in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging published from 2014 to 2025.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in evaluating axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) status in breast cancer patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 590 female breast cancer patients who had undergone both ultrasound and MRI to assess ALNs prior to any invasive procedures. Using pathological results as the standard, we compared the diagnostic performance of the two imaging modalities. Results: For differentiating between malignancy and benign ALNs, the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of ultrasound were 68.98%, 38.14%, 86.67%, 62.12% and 70.96%, respectively. MRI demonstrated corresponding values of 72.03%, 38.60%, 91.20%, 71.55% and 72.15%. In assessing the burden status of ALNs (high vs low), ultrasound yielded values of 78.47%, 52.75%, 83.17%, 36.36% and 90.61%, while MRI showed corresponding values of 81.19%, 52.75%, 86.37%, 41.38% and 90.93%. There were no statistically significant differences between the two imaging modalities in their ability to evaluate ALN malignancy or burden status. Conclusion: Both ultrasound and MRI offer comparable value in assessing ALN status. Whether evaluating for metastatic involvement or determining ALN burden, it may not be necessary for patients to undergo both imaging tests.
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.