Reasons underlying negative mammography in patients with palpable breast cancer
References (19)
- et al.
A review of false negative mammography in a symptomatic population
Clinical Radiology
(1991) - et al.
Mammography in symptomatic breast disease
Lancet
(1989) - et al.
Mammographic accuracy and patient age: a study of 297 patients undergoing breast biopsy
Clinical Radiology
(1993) Experience with mammography in a tumor institute. Evaluation of 1000 studies
Radiology
(1960)Mammography and palpable cancer of the breast
Cancer
(1988)- et al.
Mammography of women with suspicious breast lumps
Archives of Surgery
(1986) - et al.
Mammography in hospital patients: use and misuse
Journal of the Royal College of Surgeons, Edinburgh
(1992) - et al.
Use and abuse of mammography in the early diagnosis of breast cancer
Canadian Journal of Surgery
(1983) - et al.
Prognostic factors of breast neoplasms detected on screening by mammography and physical examination
Radiology
(1979)
Cited by (55)
Impact of the Addition of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) to Standard 2D Digital Screening Mammography on the Rates of Patient Recall, Cancer Detection, and Recommendations for Short-term Follow-up
2017, Academic RadiologyCitation Excerpt :However, it is an imperfect technology and there are concerns regarding false-positive results and sensitivity, particularly in dense breasts. Estimated positive predictive values (PPVs) for screening mammography average 5% (range 4.4%–16.8%) (8), and false-negative rates for symptomatic women range from 8% to 66% depending on breast density and tumor type (9–14). It is thought that the large variability in interpretation performance between radiologists is partly owing to overlapping tissue (15–20), and superior sensitivity in fatty breasts is attributed to the ability to see lesion margins better, a key factor in distinguishing benign from malignant lesions (21).
Exploring a non-inflammatory clinical breast mass: Clinical practice guidelines
2015, Journal de Gynecologie Obstetrique et Biologie de la ReproductionScreening and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer in Low-Resource Countries: What Is State of the Art?
2011, Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRICitation Excerpt :Mammography has limitations in the evaluation of the symptomatic woman, particularly in those with dense breasts. A false-negative rate as high as 16.5% has been reported for mammography in patients with a palpable breast abnormality.23 Mammographic abnormalities identified in a symptomatic woman usually require additional diagnostic ultrasound work-up, and in those with a suspicious palpable solid mass seen on a mammogram and a sonogram, the latter is a better modality for tissue sampling.
Characterization of breast lesion using double phase Tc-99m Tetrofosmin scintimammography: Comparison of visual and quantitative analyses
2006, European Journal of RadiologyAn Ad Hoc random initialization deep neural network architecture for discriminating malignant breast cancer lesions in mammographic images
2019, Contrast Media and Molecular ImagingEvaluation of breast lesions by digital mammography and ultrasound along with fine-needle aspiration cytology correlation
2018, Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics