Işil Günhan-Bilgen1, Ayşenur Oktay. 1. Ege University Hospital, Department of Radiology, Bornova 35100, Izmir, Turkey. isilbilgen@hotmail.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine and quantitate radiologic characteristics of Paget's disease of the breast and to report clinical and pathologic findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of records of 2872 women who received a diagnosis of breast carcinoma between January 1988 and January 2006 revealed 52 histologically proved Paget's disease of the breast. Analysis included history, findings at physical examination, mammography and sonography (US) and histologic type of Paget's disease. RESULTS: At physical examination, palpable mass (n=33, 63%), nipple erythema-eczema-ulceration (n=17, 33%) and blood-stained nipple discharge (n=5, 10%) were noted. Among 17 patients who had clinically evident Paget's disease, the mammographic findings were isolated microcalcifications in 3 (18%), mass associated with microcalcifications in 5 (29%), mass in 2 (12%) and negative in 7 (41%) patients. In the 35 patients with clinically inevident Paget's disease, these mammographic findings were 43% (n=15), 34% (n=12), 20% (n=7) and 3% (n=1), respectively. US depicted 43 masses in 35 patients, all of which were lobulated or irregularly contoured, mostly (n=41, 95%) without posterior acoustic shadowing. The cancer was clinically occult in 10% (n=5), mammographically occult in 15% (n=8) and radiologically occult in 13% (n=7) of the 52 patients. Histologically, the tumor was multifocal and/or multicentric in 11 (21%) patients. CONCLUSION: The clinical features of Paget's disease are characteristic and should alert the clinician to the likelihood of an underlying carcinoma, which should be evaluated radiologically. However, as Paget's disease is primarily a clinical diagnosis and mammograms may be negative, screening programs without clinical examination may result with delay in diagnosis. As a result, both clinical and imaging findings are complementary and should be correlated to confirm or exclude a diagnosis of Paget's disease.
PURPOSE: To determine and quantitate radiologic characteristics of Paget's disease of the breast and to report clinical and pathologic findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of records of 2872 women who received a diagnosis of breast carcinoma between January 1988 and January 2006 revealed 52 histologically proved Paget's disease of the breast. Analysis included history, findings at physical examination, mammography and sonography (US) and histologic type of Paget's disease. RESULTS: At physical examination, palpable mass (n=33, 63%), nipple erythema-eczema-ulceration (n=17, 33%) and blood-stained nipple discharge (n=5, 10%) were noted. Among 17 patients who had clinically evident Paget's disease, the mammographic findings were isolated microcalcifications in 3 (18%), mass associated with microcalcifications in 5 (29%), mass in 2 (12%) and negative in 7 (41%) patients. In the 35 patients with clinically inevident Paget's disease, these mammographic findings were 43% (n=15), 34% (n=12), 20% (n=7) and 3% (n=1), respectively. US depicted 43 masses in 35 patients, all of which were lobulated or irregularly contoured, mostly (n=41, 95%) without posterior acoustic shadowing. The cancer was clinically occult in 10% (n=5), mammographically occult in 15% (n=8) and radiologically occult in 13% (n=7) of the 52 patients. Histologically, the tumor was multifocal and/or multicentric in 11 (21%) patients. CONCLUSION: The clinical features of Paget's disease are characteristic and should alert the clinician to the likelihood of an underlying carcinoma, which should be evaluated radiologically. However, as Paget's disease is primarily a clinical diagnosis and mammograms may be negative, screening programs without clinical examination may result with delay in diagnosis. As a result, both clinical and imaging findings are complementary and should be correlated to confirm or exclude a diagnosis of Paget's disease.
Authors: Eleonora Gaspari; Aurora Ricci; Valeria Liberto; Angela Lia Scarano; Maria Fornari; Giovanni Simonetti Journal: Case Rep Radiol Date: 2013-03-30