Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Oct 15.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Breast Cancer. 2013 Oct 8;13(6):439–449. doi: 10.1016/j.clbc.2013.08.007

Table 4.

Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Features of Mass Lesionsa in Cases With and Without Upgrade to Malignancy

Variablesb Upgrade (n = 3) No Upgrade (n = 41) P Value
Age range (median) 47–62 (56) 31–74 (50) .428
Previous History of Breast Cancer .125
 Yes 2 8
 No 1 33
Palpable Mass .204
 Yes 2 11
 No 1 30
Size in cm (median) (n = 43) 0.7–1.6 (1.5) 0.4–3.2 (1) .774
Multiplicity of Lesion 1.000
 < 3 3 34
 Multiple (≥3) 0 7
Location 1.000
 Peripheral 2 26
 Central/retroareolar 1 15
Mammographic correlate .550
 Yes 1 26
 No 2 15
BI-RADS 1.000
 3 0 7
 4 3 34
Number of Cores Sampled (median) 4–5 (4) 2–13 (4) .940
Number of Cores Involved by Papilloma (median) (n = 37) 1–4 (1) (n = 3) 1–9 (3) (n = 34) .264
Apocrine Metaplasia in Papilloma on Core Biopsy Specimen (n = 37) 1.000
 Yes 1 11
 No 2 23

Abbreviation: BI-RAD = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System.

a

This group includes all mass lesions and calcifications with an associated mass or asymmetry biopsied under ultrasound-guidance.

b

For all variables, n = 44 unless indicated otherwise.