ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Value of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification in diagnosing breast mass-type lesions and nonmass lesions: a comparative analysis.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women worldwide. Breast lesions can be divided into mass-type lesions and nonmass lesions (NMLs) on ultrasound, with NMLs being difficult to diagnose clinically. With the development of ultrasound technology, virtual touch tissue imaging quantification (VTIQ) is being gradually applied to evaluate breast lesions in clinical practice. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of VTIQ in mass-type lesions and NMLs in a cohort of patients with Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4-5 breast cancer. Methods: A prospective cohort of patients with breast lesions classified as BI-RADS 4-5 based on ultrasonographic evaluation conducted between January 2024 and February 2025 was enrolled in this study. Lesions were categorized as mass-type lesions and NMLs according to their ultrasonographic characteristics. Shear wave velocity (SWV) was measured via VTIQ. Postoperative histopathological results served as the gold standard. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to assess diagnostic performance, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. The efficacy of SWV for diagnosing mass-type lesions and NMLs was compared. Results: This study included 761 patients with breast lesions, comprising 433 mass-type lesions (190 malignant and 243 benign) and 328 NMLs (131 malignant and 197 benign). The SWV of malignant lesions was significantly greater than that of their benign counterparts in both the mass-type and nonmass groups (P<0.001 for both). The AUC for differentiating malignant lesions from benign lesions was 0.807 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.767-0.843] for mass-type lesions and 0.886 (95% CI: 0.846-0.918) for NMLs, with optimal cutoff values of 3.39 and 3.52 m/s, respectively. In diagnosing mass-type lesions and NMLs, respectively, VTIQ had a sensitivity of 68.42% and 79.39%, a specificity 85.19% of 86.80%, a positive predictive value of 78.31% and 80.00%, a negative predictive value of 77.53% and 86.40%, and an accuracy of 77.83% and 83.80%. The sensitivity (P=0.030), negative predictive value (P=0.016), and accuracy (P=0.038) were significantly lower for mass-type lesions than for NMLs. Conclusions: VTIQ demonstrated diagnostic value for mass-type lesions and NMLs of the breast. VTIQ may exhibit superior diagnostic performance for NMLs than for mass-type lesions.
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.