Literature DB >> 11807365

Mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer reflects pathologic characteristics.

Csaba Gajdos1, Paul Ian Tartter, Ira J Bleiweiss, George Hermann, John de Csepel, Alison Estabrook, Alfred W Rademaker.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the relationship of mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer to the pathologic characteristics. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer may be associated with pathologic variables having prognostic significance, which could influence clinical management.
METHODS: The authors correlated the mammographic appearance and pathologic characteristics of 543 nonpalpable malignancies diagnosed in a single institution between July 1993 and July 1999. Cancers were divided into four groups based on mammographic presentation: mass, calcification, mass with calcification, and architectural distortion.
RESULTS: The majority of masses (95%), masses with calcifications (68%), and architectural distortions (79%) were due to invasive cancers, whereas the majority of calcifications (68%) were due to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Among invasive cancers, calcifications were associated with more extensive intraductal carcinoma, more Her2/neu immunoreactivity, and more necrosis of DCIS. Lymphatic invasion was more common in cancers presenting as a mass with calcifications. Sixty-nine percent of DCIS associated with invasive cancers presenting as calcifications were of high grade according to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. Calcifications in noninvasive tumors were associated with necrosis in DCIS. Two thirds of cancers presenting as architectural distortion had positive margins (65%) compared with 35% to 37% of other mammographic presentations. Mammographic presentation was not significantly related to tumor differentiation or estrogen or progesterone receptor status. The ratio of invasive to noninvasive malignancies increased progressively with increasing age from 1:1 in patients younger than 50 years of age to 3:1 in patients older than 70 years, whereas the proportion presenting as calcifications declined from 63% in patients younger than 50 years to 26% in patients older than 70 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Malignancies presenting as calcifications on mammography are most commonly DCIS. When invasive malignancies presented as calcifications, the calcifications were associated with accompanying high-grade DCIS, and the invasive cancers were often Her2/Neu positive. Mammographic masses with calcifications were associated with lymphatic invasion. Excisional biopsy margins were most commonly positive with architectural distortions. The mammographic appearance of nonpalpable malignancies is related to pathologic characteristics with prognostic value, which varies with patient age and influences clinical management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11807365      PMCID: PMC1422421          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200202000-00013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  25 in total

1.  Mammographic, pathologic, and treatment-related factors associated with local recurrence in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conserving therapy.

Authors:  V R Kini; F A Vicini; R Frazier; S J Victor; K Wimbish; A A Martinez
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1999-01-15       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  Efficacy of mammography for detecting early breast cancer in women under 50.

Authors:  T Yokoe; Y Iino; M Maemura; H Takei; J Horiguchi; H Matsumoto; Y Morishita; Y Koibuchi
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  1998 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.480

3.  Factors associated with clear biopsy margins and clear reexcision margins in breast cancer specimens from candidates for breast conservation.

Authors:  P I Tartter; I J Bleiweiss; S Levchenko
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  Factors affecting surgical margin clearance in screen-detected breast cancer and the effect of cavity biopsies on residual disease.

Authors:  C N Chinyama; J D Davies; Z Rayter; J R Farndon
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 4.424

5.  Histological determinants for different types of local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy of invasive breast cancer. Dutch Study Group on local Recurrence after Breast Conservation (BORST)

Authors:  A C Voogd; J L Peterse; M A Crommelin; E J Rutgers; G Botke; P H Elkhuizen; A N van Geel; C J Hoekstra; R van Pel; M J van de Vijver; J W Coebergh
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  Occult malignant breast lesions in 114 patients: relationship to age and the presence of microcalcifications.

Authors:  G Hermann; C Janus; I S Schwartz; A Papatestas; D G Hermann; J G Rabinowitz
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Can the clinical and mammographic findings at presentation predict the presence of an extensive intraductal component in early stage breast cancer?

Authors:  E A Healey; R T Osteen; S J Schnitt; R Gelman; P C Stomper; J L Connolly; J R Harris
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Clinical and radiological predictors of complete excision in breast-conserving surgery for primary breast cancer.

Authors:  J Kollias; P G Gill; B Beamond; H Rossi; S Langlois; E Vernon-Roberts
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  1998-10

9.  Women 35 years of age or younger have higher locoregional relapse rates after undergoing breast conservation therapy.

Authors:  S H Kim; A Simkovich-Heerdt; K N Tran; B Maclean; P I Borgen
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 6.113

10.  Early-onset breast cancer--histopathological and prognostic considerations.

Authors:  J Kollias; C W Elston; I O Ellis; J F Robertson; R W Blamey
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  34 in total

1.  Contrast-enhanced MRI in breast cancer patients eligible for breast-conserving therapy: complementary value for subgroups of patients.

Authors:  Eline E Deurloo; William F A Klein Zeggelink; H Jelle Teertstra; Johannes L Peterse; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Sara H Muller; Harry Bartelink; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-11-19       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Breast cancer surveillance in patients treated by radiotherapy for Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Authors:  G Mariscotti; M Durando; G Ghione; A Luparia; E Regini; C Alfieri; P P Campanino; P Gavarotti; E Brignardello; G Gandini
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  Reoperation Rates in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ vs Invasive Breast Cancer After Wire-Guided Breast-Conserving Surgery.

Authors:  Linnea Langhans; Maj-Britt Jensen; Maj-Lis M Talman; Ilse Vejborg; Niels Kroman; Tove F Tvedskov
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 14.766

4.  Correlation between mammographic and sonographic findings and prognostic factors in patients with node-negative invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  H J Shin; H H Kim; M O Huh; M J Kim; A Yi; H Kim; B H Son; S H Ahn
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-08-03       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Microcalcification-Associated Breast Cancer: Presentation, Successful First Excision, Long-Term Recurrence and Survival Rate.

Authors:  Marga B Rominger; Carolin Steinmetz; Ronny Westerman; Annette Ramaswamy; Ute-Susann Albert
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 2.860

6.  Transfer Learning From Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Diagnosis: A Comparison of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Full-Field Digital Mammography.

Authors:  Kayla Mendel; Hui Li; Deepa Sheth; Maryellen Giger
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 3.173

7.  The association between mammographic calcifications and breast cancer prognostic factors in a population-based registry cohort.

Authors:  Sarah J Nyante; Sheila S Lee; Thad S Benefield; Tiffany N Hoots; Louise M Henderson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2016-09-28       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Association between mammographic features and clinicopathological characteristics in invasive ductal carcinoma of breast cancer.

Authors:  Shan-Shan Sun; Bin Zhang; Hong-Meng Zhao; Xu-Chen Cao
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-19

9.  Mammographic features of calcifications in DCIS: correlation with oestrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status.

Authors:  Min Sun Bae; Woo Kyung Moon; Jung Min Chang; Nariya Cho; So Yeon Park; Jae-Kyung Won; Yoon-Kyung Jeon; Hyeong-Gon Moon; Wonshik Han; In Ae Park
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  Screening Algorithms in Dense Breasts: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Authors:  Wendie A Berg; Elizabeth A Rafferty; Sarah M Friedewald; Carrie B Hruska; Habib Rahbar
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.959

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.