Sonographic Features of Breast Carcinoma Presenting as Masses in<i>BRCA</i>Gene Mutation Carriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to review the sonographic features of breast cancer gene BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast carcinomas in comparison with "sporadic" breast carcinomas and benign breast masses. METHODS: Sonograms of 233 breast masses, including 33 BRCA-associated malignant masses (BRCA1, 15; BRCA2, 18), 148 sporadic malignant masses, and 52 benign masses, were reviewed by consensus by 2 radiologists according to American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) terminology. RESULTS: Most of the sporadic and BRCA1-and BRCA2-associated cancers displayed an irregular shape (91.2%, 93.3%, and 83.3%, respectively). BRCA1-associated cancers showed microlobulated margins in 53.3% versus 33.8% (sporadic) and 33.3% (BRCA2). A parallel orientation was most frequently encountered in BRCA1-associated lesions (46.7%) versus sporadic (33.8%) and BRCA2 (33.3%), whereas posterior acoustic shadowing was least frequently seen in BRCA1-associated lesions (13.3%) versus BRCA2 (16.7%) and sporadic (31.1%). Most (73.3%) of the BRCA1-associated lesions were classified as BI-RADS category 4, whereas most of the sporadic and BRCA2-associated lesions were classified as BI-RADS category 5 (66.2% and 72.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Sonographic features of BRCA-associated and sporadic breast carcinomas do not differ substantially. BRCA1-associated breast carcinomas trend toward less malignant sonographic characteristics, but strict application of the BI-RADS categorizations demands that they be classified as category 4 or 5.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".