ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Clinical-radiologic-pathologic characterization of diabetic mastopathy: an analysis of 21 cases.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. 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.
- An endocrine microbe immunity framework for granulomatous mastitis toward phenotype-oriented interpretation.iScience · 2026Review
- Multimodal Imaging of Diabetic Mastopathy: A 62-Case Study With Ultrasound-Based Classification and Diagnostic Accuracy.International journal of breast cancer · 2026Article
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
Objective: To characterize the clinic-radiologic features of diabetic mastopathy (DMP), with a focus on distinctive ultrasound findings that may aid in differential diagnosis and reduce unnecessary interventions. Methods: A retrospective multicenter analysis was performed on 21 pathologically confirmed DMP lesions from 17 patients (2014-2024). Mammographic and ultrasonographic features were independently assessed by two radiologists according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS, 5th edition). Clinical data including diabetes history were reviewed. Results: The median patient age was 58 years, with a median diabetes duration of 23.3 years. Most patients presented with a palpable mass (94.1%). Mammography showed probably benign findings (BI-RADS 3) in 73.7% of lesions, with an additional 10.5% assessed as benign (BI-RADS 2). In contrast, ultrasound revealed suspicious features: all mass-forming lesions had irregular margins (100%), 89.5% showed posterior shadowing, and critically, 78.9% demonstrated an infiltrative growth pattern with an absence of space-occupying effect. One atypical case presented with bilateral ductal dilation. Core needle biopsy yielded a specific DMP diagnosis in only 68.4% of lesions. Surgical excision was performed in 76.2% of lesions, with recurrence in 23.1% during a median follow-up of 33.5 months. Conclusion: DMP presents a diagnostic paradox of benign mammographic but suspicious sonographic appearances. The characteristic "absence of space-occupying effect" on ultrasound is a key differentiating feature from breast carcinoma. Recognizing this sign, along with atypical patterns like ductal dilation, can increase pre-biopsy diagnostic suspicion in patients with long-standing diabetes, potentially guiding more conservative management. Histopathological confirmation remains essential.
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.