Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022
Comprehensive quantitative malignant risk prediction of pure grouped amorphous calcifications: clinico-mammographic nomogram.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shen Lijuan, Jiang Tingting, Tang Pengzhou, Ge Huijuan, You Chao, Peng Weijun
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pure grouped amorphous calcifications are classified as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4B suspicious calcifications and recommended for biopsy. However, the biopsies often reveal benign findings, especially in screening mammograms (92.4-97.2%).
METHODS: Mammograms of 699 pure grouped amorphous calcifications with final pathological results were analyzed in this retrospective study. The maximum span (MS) of the group of calcifications and the MS of the parallel/vertical direction of the mammary duct (MPS/MVS) were measured, and the MPS to MVS ratio was calculated. Based on the MS and ratio, 2 prediction nomograms with other clinic-mammographic features were developed. The discrimination performance of the models was assessed and compared by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Scatterplots were created to determine the cutoff values with fewer misdiagnoses of malignant calcifications and fewer false positives.
RESULTS: Ultimately, 2 prediction models were successfully developed based on the 4 risk factors of age, purpose of the mammogram, whether multiple or single calcifications, and the MS [odds ratio (OR) =1.06, P=0.02]/ratio (OR =6.05, P<0.001). Both models had good discrimination. The ratio model performed better than the MS model in the training cohort (AUC of 0.875 and 0.834, respectively, P=0.003) and validation cohort (AUC 0.908 and 0.867, respectively, P=0.047). For the group with probably benign calcifications (as detected by the ratio nomogram), the malignancy rates were 2.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00% to 6.53%] and 1.19% (95% CI: 0.06% to 7.37%) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively, and 44.12% and 47.70% of benign biopsies were detected in the training and validation cohorts, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The clinico-mammographic quantitative malignancy risk prediction nomogram showed favorable discrimination and calibration performance. The ratio model showed better diagnostic efficiency than the MS model, and identified >40% of benign biopsies.
METHODS: Mammograms of 699 pure grouped amorphous calcifications with final pathological results were analyzed in this retrospective study. The maximum span (MS) of the group of calcifications and the MS of the parallel/vertical direction of the mammary duct (MPS/MVS) were measured, and the MPS to MVS ratio was calculated. Based on the MS and ratio, 2 prediction nomograms with other clinic-mammographic features were developed. The discrimination performance of the models was assessed and compared by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Scatterplots were created to determine the cutoff values with fewer misdiagnoses of malignant calcifications and fewer false positives.
RESULTS: Ultimately, 2 prediction models were successfully developed based on the 4 risk factors of age, purpose of the mammogram, whether multiple or single calcifications, and the MS [odds ratio (OR) =1.06, P=0.02]/ratio (OR =6.05, P<0.001). Both models had good discrimination. The ratio model performed better than the MS model in the training cohort (AUC of 0.875 and 0.834, respectively, P=0.003) and validation cohort (AUC 0.908 and 0.867, respectively, P=0.047). For the group with probably benign calcifications (as detected by the ratio nomogram), the malignancy rates were 2.7% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00% to 6.53%] and 1.19% (95% CI: 0.06% to 7.37%) in the training and validation cohorts, respectively, and 44.12% and 47.70% of benign biopsies were detected in the training and validation cohorts, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The clinico-mammographic quantitative malignancy risk prediction nomogram showed favorable discrimination and calibration performance. The ratio model showed better diagnostic efficiency than the MS model, and identified >40% of benign biopsies.