| Literature DB >> 22715888 |
Guerino Barbalaco Neto1, Claudia Rossetti, Fernando L Fonseca, Vitor E Valenti, Luiz Carlos de Abreu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the presence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in core needle biopsies (CNB) from invasive ductal lesions.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22715888 PMCID: PMC3432016 DOI: 10.1186/1755-7682-5-19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Arch Med ISSN: 1755-7682
Frequency distribution of 90 patients, according to the percentage range of the in situ component, the number of fragments and stage
| | | | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | < 40 years | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | |
| Age 2 | 40 – 60 | 42 | 62.7 | 15 | 65.2 | 1(2) |
| Range 1 | > 60 years | 23 | 34.3 | 8 | 34.8 | |
| | | 7 | 10.5 | | | |
| | | 9 | 13.4 | | | |
| | | 41 | 61.2 | 0 | 0 | |
| | | 6 | 9 | 4 | | 0.013(2) |
| | T4 | 2 | 3 | 9 | | |
| | T3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 17.4 | |
| | T2 | 0 | 0 | | 39.1 | |
| | T1c | | | | 13 | |
| | T1b | | | 1 | 4.4 | |
| | T1a | | | 4 | 17.4 | |
| Stage | T1 mic | 2 | 8.7 | |||
Comparison of positive and negative groups regarding the extensive in situ component in the specimen
| | | P | | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 1 - 2 | 4 | 6,0 | 3 | 13 | |
| | 3 - 4 | 49 | 73.1 | 16 | 69.6 | 0.539(1) |
| | 5 - 6 | 14 | 20.9 | 4 | 17.4 | |
| | 0 | 51 | 76,1 | 6 | 26.1 | |
| | 1 – 5 | 08 | 11.9 | 3 | 13 | |
| Range (%) | 6 – 24 | 7 | 10.4 | 4 | 17.4 | |
| | 26 - 50 | 1 | 1.5 | 4 | 17.4 | < 0,001(2) |
| | 51 - 75 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4.4 | |
| 76 - 99 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 21.7 | ||
(1) descriptive level of probability of the Chi-square test.
(2) descriptive level of probability of the Fisher’s exact test.
Correlation of overlap between the different histologic patterns identified in the CIE BAG and> 45% in the piece
| 0 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | |
| 4 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | |
| 4 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | |
| 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Values of the estimated probability, odds ratios and indices of efficiency of logistic regression model
| 0 | 0.117 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 5 | 0.180 | 9.03 | 3.05 | 26.78 | 73.9 | 76.1 | 48.5 | 10.5 | 75.6 | < 0.001 |
| 10 | 0.265 | 11.47 | 3.77 | 35.04 | 60.9 | 88.1 | 36.4 | 13.2 | 81.1 | < 0.001 |
| 15 | 0.374 | 42.25 | 8.27 | 215.77 | 56.5 | 97 | 13.3 | 13.3 | 86.7 | < 0.001 |
| 20 | 0.496 | 42.25 | 8.27 | 215.77 | 56.5 | 97 | 13.3 | 13.3 | 86.7 | < 0.001 |
| 25 | 0.619 | 60.50 | 7.14 | 512.94 | 47.8 | 98.5 | 8.3 | 15.4 | 85.6 | < 0.001 |
| 30 | 0.728 | 50.77 | 5.97 | 431.48 | 43.5 | 98.5 | 9.1 | 16.5 | 84.4 | < 0.001 |
| 35 | 0.815 | 42.43 | 4.97 | 362.41 | 39.1 | 98.5 | 10 | 17.5 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 40 | 0.879 | 42.43 | 4.97 | 362.41 | 39.1 | 98.5 | 10 | 17.5 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 45 | 0.923 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 50 | 0.952 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 55 | 0.970 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 60 | 0.982 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 65 | 0.989 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 70 | 0.993 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 75 | 0.996 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 80 | 0.998 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 85 | 0.998 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
| 90 | 0.999 | - | - | - | 34.8 | 100 | 0 | 18.3 | 83.3 | < 0.001 |
Sensitivity (S), specificity (E), False Positive (FP), False Negatives (FN), Lower Limit (LL) Upper Limit (UL).
Figure 1Logistic curve. Log (p/1-p) = -2.019 + 0.101% *Core%. p = probability of the patient to be positive.
Figure 2ROC curve for the% of DCIS found in the specimen.