ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Magnetic resonance imaging features and diagnostic value analysis of non-mass enhancement lesions of the breast.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. 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.
- Magnetic resonance imaging findings of non-mass enhancements in the breast and their association with malignancy.Medicine · 2026Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Due to the presence of distinctive morphological features and diverse pathological types, evaluation of breast non-mass enhancement (NME) lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is challenging, generating more false-positive results as compared to enhancing mass lesions. Our objective was to identify the MRI features capable of distinguishing between benign and malignant NME lesions in the breast. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted, in which the clinical data and MRI manifestations of 101 NME lesions were examined and confirmed through surgical or biopsy pathology. Statistical analyses, including Results: The study included 101 NME lesions from 98 patients (34 benign and 67 malignant). No statistically significant differences were observed in terms of clinical characteristics between the benign and malignant groups. However, there were significant differences in lesion maximum diameter (P=0.003), morphological distribution (P=0.003), internal enhancement patterns (P<0.001), time-intensity curve (TIC) types (P<0.001), early and delayed enhancement rates (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and T2 ratio (P=0.02). Notably, the diagnostic efficacy of ADC values was highest for the minimum value within a small region of interest (small ROI), yielding an area under the curve as high as 0.884. Conclusions: A comprehensive analysis of MRI features indicated their significant value for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant NME lesions of the breast.
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.