1. Klein KA, Kocher M, Lourenco AP et al (2023) ACR appropriateness criteria® palpable breast masses: 2022 update. J Am Coll Radiol 20:S146-S163. Doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2023.02.013

2. Anonymous (2011) Definition of mass - NCI dictionary of cancer terms - NCI. 2024

3. Patel BK, Lobbes MBI, Lewin J (2018) Contrast enhanced spectral mammography: A review. Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MRI 39:70-79. Doi:10.1053/j.sult.2017.08.005

4. Anonymous Tomosynthesis (3D mammography). 2024

5. Ibrahim AS, Khaled HM, Mikhail NN, Baraka H, Kamel H (2014) Cancer incidence in egypt: Results of the national population-based cancer registry program. Journal of Cancer Epidemiology 2014:437971-18. Doi:10.1155/2014/437971

6. Anonymous Homepage – IARC. 2024

7. Ma I, Dueck A, Gray R et al (2012) Clinical and self breast examination remain important in the era of modern screening. Ann Surg Oncol 19:1484-1490. Doi:10.1245/s10434-011-2162-9

8. Salzman B, Collins E, Hersh L (2019) Common breast problems. American family physician 99:505-514

9. DENNIS MA, PARKER SH, KLAUS AJ, STAVROS AT, KASKE TI, CLARK SB (2001) Breast biopsy avoidance: The value of normal mammograms and normal sonograms in the setting of a palpable lump. Radiology 219:186-191. Doi:10.1148/radiology.219.1.r01ap35186

10. MOY L, SLANETZ PJ, KOPANS DB et al (2002) Specificity of mammography and US in the evaluation of a palpable abnormality: Retrospective review. Radiology 225:176-181. Doi:10.1148/radiol.2251010999

11. Shetty MK, Shah YP (2002) Prospective evaluation of the value of negative sonographic and mammographic findings in patients with palpable abnormalities of the breast. Journal of ultrasound in medicine 21:1211-1220. Doi:10.7863/jum.2002.21.11.1211

12. Chan CHF, Coopey SB, Freer PE, Hughes KS (2015) False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses. Breast Cancer Res Treat 153:699-702. Doi:10.1007/s10549-015-3557-2

13. Zuley ML, Guo B, Catullo VJ et al (2014) Comparison of two-dimensional synthesized mammograms versus original digital mammograms alone and in combination with tomosynthesis images. Radiology 271:664-671. Doi:10.1148/radiol.13131530

14. Hawley JR, Kang-Chapman JK, Bonnet SE, Kerger AL, Taylor CR, Erdal BS (2018) Diagnostic accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis in the evaluation of palpable breast abnormalities. Academic radiology 25:297-304. Doi:10.1016/j.acra.2017.09.016

15. Leung SE, Ben-Nachum I, Kornecki A (2016) New palpable breast lump with recent negative mammogram: Is repeat mammography necessary? American journal of roentgenology (1976) 207:200-204. Doi:10.2214/AJR.15.14799

16. Anonymous (2019) ACR practice parameter for the performance of a breast ultrasound examination. Int Urogynecol J 30:1389-1400. Doi:10.1007/s00192-019-03954-5

17. Pötsch N, Vatteroni G, Clauser P, Helbich TH, Baltzer PAT (2022) Contrast-enhanced mammography versus contrast-enhanced breast MRI: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 305:94. Doi:10.1148/radiol.212530

18. WARNER E, MESSERSMITH H, CAUSER P, EISEN A, SHUMAK R, PLEWES D (2008) Systematic review: Using magnetic resonance imaging to screen women at high risk for breast cancer. Annals of internal medicine 148:671-679. Doi:10.7326/0003-4819-148-9-200805060-00007

19. Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Moy L (2019) Contrast‐enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening. Journal of magnetic resonance imaging 50:377-390. Doi:10.1002/jmri.26654

20. Jochelson MS, Lobbes MBI (2021) Contrast-enhanced mammography: State of the art. Radiology 299:36-48. Doi:10.1148/radiol.2021201948

21. Kim G, Phillips J, Cole E et al (2019) Comparison of contrast-enhanced mammography with conventional digital mammography in breast cancer screening: A pilot study. Journal of the American College of Radiology 16:1456-1463. Doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2019.04.007

22. Coffey K, Jochelson MS (2022) Contrast-enhanced mammography in breast cancer screening. European journal of radiology 156:110513. Doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110513

23. Garg S, Mohan H, Bal A, Attri AK, Kochhar S (2007) A comparative analysis of core needle biopsy and fine-needle aspiration cytology in the evaluation of palpable and mammographically detected suspicious breast lesions. Diagnostic cytopathology 35:681-689. Doi:10.1002/dc.20721

24. Ly A, Ono JC, Hughes KS, Pitman MB, Balassanian R (2016) Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of palpable breast masses: Patterns of clinical use and patient experience. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 14:527-536. Doi:10.6004/jnccn.2016.0061

25. Polat DS, Merchant K, Hayes J, Omar L, Compton L, Dogan BE (2023) Outcome of imaging and biopsy of BI-RADS category 3 lesions: Follow-up compliance, biopsy, and malignancy rates in a large patient cohort. Journal of ultrasound in medicine 42:1285-1296. Doi:10.1002/jum.16142

26. Buch KA, Qureshi MM, Carpentier B et al (2015) Surveillance of probably benign (BI-RADS 3) lesions in mammography: What is the right follow-up protocol? The breast journal 21:168-174. Doi:10.1111/tbj.12387

27. Lee KA, Talati N, Oudsema R, Steinberger S, Margolies LR (2018) BI-RADS 3: Current and future use of probably benign. Curr Radiol Rep 6:5. Doi:10.1007/s40134-018-0266-8

28. Radiology ACo (2017) ACR practice parameter for the performance of ultrasound-guided percutaneous breast interventional procedures.

29. Durfee SM, Selland DG, Smith DN, Lester SC, Kaelin CM, Meyer JE (2000) Sonographic evaluation of clinically palpable breast cancers invisible on mammography. The breast journal 6:247-251. Doi:10.1046/j.1524-4741.2000.99111.x

30. Harvey JA (2006) Sonography of palpable breast masses. Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MRI 27:284-297. Doi:10.1053/j.sult.2006.05.003

31. Lehman CD, Lee AY, Lee CI (2014) Imaging management of palpable breast abnormalities. American journal of roentgenology (1976) 203:1142-1153. Doi:10.2214/AJR.14.12725

32. Gumus H, Gumus M, Mills P et al (2012) Clinically palpable breast abnormalities with normal imaging: Is clinically guided biopsy still required? Clinical radiology 67:437-440. Doi:10.1016/j.crad.2011.10.010

33. Ciatto S, Houssami N (2007) Breast imaging and needle biopsy in women with clinically evident breast cancer: Does combined imaging change overall diagnostic sensitivity? Breast (Edinburgh) 16:382-386. Doi:10.1016/j.breast.2007.01.007

34. LEHMAN CD, LEE CI, LOVING VA, PORTILLO MS, PEACOCK S, DEMARTINI WB (2012) Accuracy and value of breast ultrasound for primary imaging evaluation of symptomatic women 30-39 years of age. American journal of roentgenology (1976) 199:1169-1177. Doi:10.2214/AJR.12.8842

35. Harvey JA (2006) Sonography of palpable breast masses. Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MRI 27:284-297. Doi:10.1053/j.sult.2006.05.003

36. Gonzaga MA (2011) How accurate is ultrasound in evaluating palpable breast masses? The Pan African medical journal 7:1. Doi:10.4314/pamj.v7i1.69094

37. Lee WK, Chung J, Cha E, Lee JE, Kim JH (2016) Digital breast tomosynthesis and breast ultrasound: Additional roles in dense breasts with category 0 at conventional digital mammography. European journal of radiology 85:291-296. Doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.09.026

38. Barr RG, Zhang Z, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB, Berg WA (2013) Probably benign lesions at screening breast US in a population with elevated risk: Prevalence and rate of malignancy in the ACRIN 6666 trial. Radiology 269:701-712. Doi:10.1148/radiol.13122829