ArticleInsights into imaging2026
The underestimated risk of additional ipsilateral BI-RADS 3 lesions identified by preoperative ultrasound in breast cancer patients.
Article in Insights into imaging, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the prevalence of malignancy of additional ultrasound BI-RADS category 3 lesions in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween July 2014 and June 2022, women with newly diagnosed breast cancer and additional ultrasound BI-RADS 3 lesions were retrospectively included. Malignancy was confirmed by pathology, and malignancy rates were assessed at both the patient and lesion levels. Independent risk factors for malignant BI-RADS 3 lesions were identified using multivariable logistic regression.
resultsA total of 1458 women (median age, 45 years; IQR: 40-51) with 1995 ultrasound BI-RADS 3 lesions were included. At the patient level, malignancy was identified in 3.5% of patients (51/1458), with higher rates for ipsilateral than contralateral BI-RADS 3 lesions (9.8% [39/397] vs 1.1% [12/1061]; p < 0.001). At the lesion level, the overall malignancy rate was 2.7% (54/1995), similarly elevated for ipsilateral compared with contralateral lesions (7.5% [41/544] vs 0.9% [13/1451]; p < 0.001). Independent predictors for malignancy of ipsilateral BI-RADS 3 lesions included same-quadrant location as the primary lesion (OR, 4.3; 95% CI: 1.9, 9.7; p < 0.001), ultrasonographic architectural distortion of the primary lesion (OR, 8.5; 95% CI: 1.6, 46.1; p = 0.01), and mammographic suspicious calcification of the primary lesion (OR, 2.9; 95% CI: 1.4, 6.0; p = 0.004).
conclusionAdditional ipsilateral ultrasound BI-RADS 3 lesions in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer demonstrated malignancy rates exceeding the 2% BI-RADS threshold, particularly when located in the same quadrant as the primary cancer. KEY POINTS: Question The malignancy risk of additional BI-RADS 3 lesions identified by preoperative ultrasound in breast cancer patients remains unclear. Findings Ipsilateral lesions, especially in the same quadrant, show malignancy rates exceeding 2%, while malignancy risk remains low for contralateral BI-RADS 3 lesions. Critical relevance statement Ipsilateral BI-RADS 3 lesions in the same quadrant as the primary cancer, or those with primary tumor architectural distortion or suspicious calcifications, warrant biopsy. This ensures precise surgical planning and avoids missing additional malignancy.
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.