Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020 Aug 28;184(3):873–880. doi: 10.1007/s10549-020-05890-1

Table 1.

Rate of upgrade in patients with pure ADH-BD by core biopsy factors Frequency (percent) reported unless otherwise noted.

Overall (n = 236) Upgraded (n = 108) Not upgraded (n = 128) p value*
Core needle biopsy diagnosis 0.39
  “Reaching/approaching DCIS” 29 11 (10.2) 18 (14.1)
  “Bordering on DCIS” 104 50 (46.3) 54 (42.2)
  “Suspicious for DCIS” 16 10 (9.3) 6 (4.7)
  “Markedly atypical ductal hyperplasia” 87 37 (34.3) 50 (39.1)
Indication for biopsy < 0.001
  Indeterminate calcifications 171 65 (60.2) 106 (82.8)
  Mass 52 34 (31.5) 18 (14.1)
  Suspicious MRI enhancement 10 6 (5.6) 4 (3.1)
  Unknown 3 3 (2.8) 0 (0)
Type of core biopsy 0.001
  MR-guided 10 6 (5.6) 4 (3.1)
  Stereotactic 155 57 (52.8) 98 (76.6)
  Ultrasound-guided 48 32 (29.6) 16 (12.5)
  Unknown 23 13 (12.0) 10 (7.8)
Number of core specimens Median (range), n 8 (1, 31), 74 6 (1, 27), 37 8 (1, 31), 37 0.04
Needle gauge Median (range), n 11 (6, 22), 89 11 (8, 14), 46 11 (6, 22), 43 0.27
*

Results from Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables, and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables.

Number of core specimens is missing for 67% of the observations.

Needle gauge is missing for 62% of the observations.

ADH-BD atypical ductal hyperplasia bordering on ductal carcinoma in situ, DCIS ductal carcinoma in situ, MR magnetic resonance