Literature DB >> 14695385

Invasive cancers detected after breast cancer screening yielded a negative result: relationship of mammographic density to tumor prognostic factors.

Marilyn A Roubidoux1, Janet E Bailey, Linda A Wray, Mark A Helvie.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate common breast tumor prognostic characteristics, including estrogen receptor (ER) status, grade, size, and method of detection, in relationship to mammographic density.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved 121 women who had negative results at both screening mammography and breast physical examination within 17 months before a diagnosis of breast cancer. Mammographic density was classified according to Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System patterns 1 through 4 (where 1 indicates a fatty breast and 4 indicates a dense breast). Axillary nodal status and tumor histologic ER status, histologic grade, size, stage, and method of detection (mammography alone, palpation alone, or both palpation and mammography) were analyzed by density category and tested for statistically significant differences across categories by using analysis of variance.
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences (P <.05) by density category were found for the following variables: ER positivity (15 of 15 tumors in category 1 breasts, 32 of 41 tumors in category 2 breasts, 37 of 49 tumors in category 3 breasts, and eight of 16 tumors in category 4 breasts were ER positive), occurrence of grade 1 tumors (eight, 11, 19, and four tumors in category 1, category 2, category 3, and category 4 breasts, respectively, were grade 1), mean tumor size (11.3, 13.0, 14.7, and 19.7 mm for category 1, category 2, category 3, and category 4 breasts, respectively), detection with mammography alone (13, 31, 36, and four tumors in category 1, category 2, category 3, and category 4 breasts, respectively, were detected with mammography alone), and occurrence of stage I tumors (10, 25, 28, and five tumors in category 1, category 2, category 3, and category 4 breasts, respectively, were stage I).
CONCLUSION: In women with negative results at clinical and mammographic screening within 17 months before breast tumor detection, subsequently diagnosed cancers tend to be ER negative, of higher grade, and larger in size in those with dense tissue patterns than in those with fat patterns. Copyright RSNA, 2004

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14695385     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2301020589

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  33 in total

1.  Breast cancer risk by breast density, menopause, and postmenopausal hormone therapy use.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Andrea J Cook; Diana S M Buist; Steve R Cummings; Celine Vachon; Pamela Vacek; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-07-19       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Rebecca A Hubbard; Diana L Miglioretti; Berta M Geller; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Constance D Lehman; Stephen H Taplin; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Does breast density show difference in patients with estrogen receptor-positive and estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer measured on MRI?

Authors:  J-H Chen; F-T Hsu; H-N Shih; C-C Hsu; D Chang; K Nie; O Nalcioglu; M-Y Su
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  Breast density influences tumor subtypes and tumor aggressiveness.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Amanda I Phipps
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 5.  A review of the influence of mammographic density on breast cancer clinical and pathological phenotype.

Authors:  Michael S Shawky; Cecilia W Huo; Kara Britt; Erik W Thompson; Michael A Henderson; Andrew Redfern
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Early-stage invasive breast cancers: potential role of optical tomography with US localization in assisting diagnosis.

Authors:  Quing Zhu; Poornima U Hegde; Andrew Ricci; Mark Kane; Edward B Cronin; Yasaman Ardeshirpour; Chen Xu; Andres Aguirre; Scott H Kurtzman; Peter J Deckers; Susan H Tannenbaum
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-06-22       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 7.  Digital mammography imaging: breast tomosynthesis and advanced applications.

Authors:  Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 8.  Cryosurgery of breast cancer.

Authors:  Lizhi Niu; Liang Zhou; Kecheng Xu
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2012-08

9.  Relationship between mammographic density and breast cancer death in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Authors:  Gretchen L Gierach; Laura Ichikawa; Karla Kerlikowske; Louise A Brinton; Ghada N Farhat; Pamela M Vacek; Donald L Weaver; Catherine Schairer; Stephen H Taplin; Mark E Sherman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-08-21       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 10.  Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue. A systematic review.

Authors:  Monika Nothacker; Volker Duda; Markus Hahn; Mathias Warm; Friedrich Degenhardt; Helmut Madjar; Susanne Weinbrenner; Ute-Susann Albert
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-09-20       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.