European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2011
Comparison of the dermatoglyphic characteristics of women with and without breast cancer.
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.
Sariri Elaheh, Kashanian Maryam, Vahdat Mansoureh, Yari Saeedeh
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the dermatoglyphic characteristics of women with and without breast cancer.
STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study. One hundred and thirty women=130 women with histopathologically confirmed breast cancer (case group) were compared with 127 women in the same age group but without breast cancer (control group). Fingerprints of the two groups were compared in terms of whorl, loop and arch patterns.
RESULTS: The loop pattern was most common in both groups [68 women (52.3%) in the case group and 58 women (45.7%) in the control group], followed by the whorl pattern [60 women (46.2%) in the case group and 64 women (50.4%) in the control group]; the difference was not significant (p=0.337). The number of whorl patterns and the breakdown by classification group did not differ significantly between the two groups. In addition, no significant difference was found in the dermatologlyphic patterns of the women with breast cancer with and without a family history of breast cancer.
CONCLUSION: No difference was found in the dermatoglyphic characteristics of women with and without breast cancer. As such, this does not appear to be an effective screening method for women at risk for breast cancer.
STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study. One hundred and thirty women=130 women with histopathologically confirmed breast cancer (case group) were compared with 127 women in the same age group but without breast cancer (control group). Fingerprints of the two groups were compared in terms of whorl, loop and arch patterns.
RESULTS: The loop pattern was most common in both groups [68 women (52.3%) in the case group and 58 women (45.7%) in the control group], followed by the whorl pattern [60 women (46.2%) in the case group and 64 women (50.4%) in the control group]; the difference was not significant (p=0.337). The number of whorl patterns and the breakdown by classification group did not differ significantly between the two groups. In addition, no significant difference was found in the dermatologlyphic patterns of the women with breast cancer with and without a family history of breast cancer.
CONCLUSION: No difference was found in the dermatoglyphic characteristics of women with and without breast cancer. As such, this does not appear to be an effective screening method for women at risk for breast cancer.