High rate of postoperative upstaging of ductal carcinoma in situ when prioritizing ultrasound evaluation of mammography-detected lesions: a single-center retrospective cohort study

Table 2 Upstaging risk factor analysis for the general variables in all patients (N = 272)

Variables		Logistic regression			Multiple logistic regression
Variables	n	OR	95% CI	P	OR	95% CI	P
Patient characteristics
Age	272	0.997	0.97–1.02	0.80
BMI	269	0.98	0.92–1.04	0.48
Previous history of breast cancer	272	0.8	0.3–1.7	0.54
Family history of breast cancer	272	0.9	0.5–1.6	0.62
Side = right	272	1.2	0.7–1.9	0.54
Palpability	272	7.6	4.3–13.7	<0.001	2.2	0.7–6.6	0.16
US and MG variables
US lesion size (cm)	246	3.8	2.7–5.6	<0.001	1.6	0.8–3.1	0.18
MG BI-RADS category (4, 5)	229	0.4	0.2–0.7	<0.001	1.2	0.4–3.9	0.80
MG mass or distortion	207	2.9	1.5–5.5	0.001	1.5	0.5–4.8	0.44
MG calcification	210	0.6	0.3–1.05	0.07	1.4	0.4–4.5	0.60
DCIS histological characteristics
Diagnostic method (US-CNB)	272	32.0	13.5–95.0	<0.001	10.3	2.0–64	0.007
High DCIS grade	206	3.4	1.9–6.1	<0.001	2.2	0.8–6.6	0.16
Suspicious of microinvasion	261	15.2	3.0–277.0	0.009	3.8	0.6–75	0.24
Negative ER	217	2.1	1.1–4.0	0.02	1.1	0.4–3.2	0.92

Abbreviations: OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, BMI body mass index, US ultrasound, MG mammogram, US-CNB ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy, DCIS ductal carcinoma in situ, ER estrogen receptor, BI-RADS The Breast Imaging and Data System

ISSN: 1477-7819