Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Oct 2.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Surg Oncol. 2023 Mar 11;30(7):4087–4094. doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-13319-4

Table 2:

Univariate analysis of factors associated with upgrade at excision in focal ADH cohort

Variable Overall (n=98) n (%) No Upgrade (n=91) n (n%) Upgrade (n=7) n (n%) p-value
Age 0.2
<50 years 32 (33%) 28 (31%) 4 (57%)
≥50 years 66 (67%) 63 (69%) 3 (43%)
Imaging modality 0.2
Mammogram 80 (82%) 74 (81%) 6 (86%)
MRI 13 (13%) 13 (14%) 0 (0%)
Ultrasound 5 (5.1%) 4 (4.4%) 1 (14%)
Imaging target 0.6
Calcifications 78 (80%) 72 (79%) 6 (86%)
Mass 7 (7.1%) 6 (6.6%) 1 (14%)
Non-mass enhancement 9 (9.2%) 9 (9.9%) 0 (0%)
Mass enhancement 4 (4.1%) 4 (4.4%) 0 (0%)
Target lesion diameter 0.15
1–5 mm 46 (47%) 44 (49%) 2 (29%)
6–10 mm 30 (30%) 25 (27%) 5 (71%)
11–20 mm 15 (15%) 15 (17%) 0 (0%)
>20 mm 7 (7.2%) 7 (7.8%) 0 (0%)
Target fully removed by CNB 0.7
Yes 37 (38%) 35 (38%) 2 (29%)
No 61 (62%) 56 (62%) 5 (71%)
Co-existing atypia in CNB
FEA 20 (20%) 16 (18%) 4 (57%) 0.03
Lobular neoplasia 27 (28%) 25 (27%) 2 (29%) >0.9
Prior/concurrent breast carcinoma >0.9
Yes 34 (35%) 32 (35%) 2 (29%)
No 64 (65%) 59 (65%) 5 (71%)

CNB – core needle biopsy, ADH – atypical ductal hyperplasia, FEA – flat epithelial atypia