Factors associated with upgrading to malignancy at surgery of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed on core biopsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that 4-54% of breast lesions reported on core biopsies as atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) are upgraded on further excision to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive carcinoma. We evaluated the rate of upgrading ADH to carcinoma at surgery for ADH diagnosed by percutaneous biopsy, and examined characteristics associated with malignancy. We identified 13,488 consecutive biopsies conducted at one center over a nine-year period. A total of 422 biopsies with ADH in 415 patients were included. DCIS or invasive carcinoma was found in 132 cases (31.3% upgrading). Multivariate model revealed that ipsilateral breast symptoms, mammographic lesion other than microcalcifications alone, 14G core needle biopsy, papilloma co-diagnosis, severe ADH and pathologists with lower volume of ADH diagnosis were factors statistically associated with malignancy. However, no subgroups were identified for safe clinical-only follow-up. Surgery is recommended in all cases of ADH diagnosed by percutaneous breast biopsy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".