Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Radiol. Aug 28, 2016; 8(8): 743-749
Published online Aug 28, 2016. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v8.i8.743
Table 2 Comparison between patients’ clinicopathological characteristics and positron emission tomography/computed tomography findings
FDG uptake
SUVmax
NegativePositivePercentP1P2mean ± SDP3P4
Age (yr)< 55101356.5%0.7850.3731.88 ± 1.090.0770.210
≥ 55141551.7%1.44 ± 0.66
Symptomatic presentationY21184.6%0.0120.0192.36 ± 1.240.0020.001
N221743.6%1.39 ± 0.59
PalpabilityY31280.0%0.0300.0831.99 ± 0.870.0240.853
N211643.2%1.49 ± 0.87
Biopsy deviceCNB51575.0%0.0230.0011.86 ± 0.680.0120.031
VAB191340.6%1.49 ± 0.99
Image guidanceUS182760.0%0.0400.5451.73 ± 0.920.0060.849
ST6114.3%0.99 ± 0.20
Calcification at MGY151244.4%0.1770.3231.44 ± 0.660.1070.214
N91664.0%1.84 ± 1.07
Mass formation at MRIY3562.5%0.7110.2151.76 ± 0.720.3480.253
N212352.3%1.61 ± 0.93
Lesion size at MRI (mm)< 2014422.2%0.0010.0011.24 ± 0.570.0100.049
≥ 20102470.6%1.84 ± 0.97
Comedo necrosisY91359.1%0.5810.2841.69 ± 0.850.6340.301
N151550.0%1.59 ± 0.94
ERY192354.8%10.2491.67 ± 0.960.8890.628
N5550.0%1.47 ± 056
PgRY182052.6%10.6081.64 ± 0.960.8040.731
N6857.1%1.60 ± 0.72
HER2Y101254.5%10.6811.65 ± 0.780.7880.496
N141653.3%1.62 ± 0.98
Nuclear grade1202252.4%0.7360.5101.64 ± 0.930.8980.718
2.34660.0%1.61 ± 0.79
Tumor size at pathology< 2012320.0%0.0020.7081.19 ± 0.550.0080.516
≥ 20122567.6%1.81 ± 0.97