ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
The value of contrast-enhanced energy-spectrum mammography combined with clinical indicators in detecting breast cancer in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 lesions.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast lesions: qualitative and quantitative analyses.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Development and validation of an intratumoral-peritumoral deep transfer learning fusion model for differentiating BI-RADS 3-4 breast nodules.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a screening model for benign and malignant breast masses based on S-Detect and microvascular flow imaging.Gland surgery · 2025Article
- Diagnostic test of conventional ultrasonography combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the subcategorization of suspicious Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 breast lesions.Translational cancer research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Under the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), category 4 lesions have a high probability of malignancy. This study sought to investigate the efficacy of a model that combined the BI-RADS score with the enhancement score and clinical indicators in the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 lesions based on contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) in breast cancer patients. Methods: The data of female patients with BI-RADS scores of 4 who underwent CESM at the Department of Medical Imaging of the Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from January 2018 to July 2023 were retrospectively collected. In total, 170 patients were enrolled in the study. Based on their surgery or puncture pathology results, the patients were divided into malignant and benign groups. The clinical data, imaging characteristics, and enhancement degree of the patients in the two groups were compared. Model 3, which combined the BI-RADS score, enhancement score, and clinical indicators, was constructed using logistic regression. The predictive performance of Model 3 was evaluated and compared with Model 1 (BI-RADS score) and Model 2 (BI-RADS score + enhancement score). Results: Of the 170 patients, 69 had benign lesions and 101 had malignant lesions. There were significant differences between the malignant and benign groups in terms of age, menopause, a family history breast cancer, BI-RADS score, and enhancement score (all P<0.05). The areas under the curve (AUCs) of the receiver operator characteristic curves of Models 1, 2, and 3 were 0.830, 0.858, and 0.900, respectively. The best cut-off value for Model 3 was 0.766, with a sensitivity of 74.3% and a specificity of 94.2%. Based on the AUCs and decision curves, Model 3 performed better than Models 1 and 2. The calibration curve (intercept: 0.034; slope: 0.807) was plotted using bootstrap re-sampling (500 times), and showed good agreement between the predicted probability and the actual prevalence. Conclusions: In the suspected breast cancer patients with a BI-RADS score of 4, the combination of the enhancement score and clinical indicators based on the BI-RADS score improved the efficiency of CESM in diagnosing breast cancer.
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.