ArticleTranslational cancer research2025
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.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2025. 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.
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for differentiating benign from malignant Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 4a breast lesions: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Current and future perspectives of molecular breast imaging with [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Review
- An observational study of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in diagnosing malignant breast masses.Polish journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Impact of contrast-enhanced ultrasound optimized breast imaging reporting and data system category on the biopsy decision for non-mass breast lesions.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- A dual-core driven hybrid radiomics integrates multiple views of greyscale ultrasound image for the early management from diagnosis to biopsy suggestion of BI-RADS 4 breast lesions: a prospective multicenter study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although conventional ultrasonography (CUS) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) play a critical role in cancer detection, diagnosis, and image-guided biopsies, there is no standardized diagnostic approach for the clinical evaluation of suspected Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4 breast lesions. This diagnostic test evaluates the complementary roles of CUS and CEUS in addressing limitations of conventional imaging, such as microvascular visualization. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of combining CUS with CEUS in subcategorizing suspicious breast lesions classified as BI-RADS for ultrasound (US-BI-RADS) category 4. Methods: The data of 131 patients with BI-RADS category 4 breast lesions, examined between February 2017 and March 2023, were retrospectively analyzed. All lesions underwent pathological examination following surgery and served as the gold standard for diagnosis. Key features such as lesion margins, echogenicity, size, microcalcification, blood flow distribution via color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI), and CEUS characteristics were assessed. CEUS scores were calculated using a five-point scoring system. Stepwise logistic regression was applied to evaluate the odds ratios (ORs) of the lesion characteristics on US and CEUS. The combination of the US-BI-RADS and CEUS scores (termed the CEUS-BI-RADS) was compared to the US-BI-RADS alone, and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted to determine the diagnostic performance of these methods. Results: Of the 131 lesions, 62 (47.3%) were benign, and 69 (52.7%) were malignant. The multivariate logistic regression identified the primary indicators of malignancy as calcification [OR =1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-2.91, P=0.02], suspicious or abnormal axillary lymph nodes (OR =2.51, 95% CI: 0.59-4.44, P=0.01), obscure margins after enhancement (OR =2.67, 95% CI: 0.35 to 4.99, P=0.02), and increased lesion size (OR =4.89, 95% CI: 1.45-8.33, P=0.005). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the US-BI-RADS were 73.9%, 74.2%, 74.0%, 71.9%, and 76.1%, respectively, while those of the CEUS-BI-RADS were 92.8%, 79.0%, 86.3%, 90.7%, and 83.1%, respectively. The areas under the ROC curves for the US-BI-RADS and CEUS-BI-RADS were 0.741 and 0.859, respectively. Conclusions: The CEUS-BI-RADS significantly enhances diagnostic efficacy for BI-RADS category 4 breast lesions, outperforming the US-BI-RADS and could reduce unnecessary biopsies.
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.