Literature DB >> 20494311

The effectiveness of MR imaging in the assessment of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast.

Ritse M Mann1.   

Abstract

Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast is, due to its diffuse infiltrative growth pattern, a diagnostic challenge. Even in retrospect, only up to 80% are visible at mammography. Moreover, both mammography and ultrasound tend to structurally underestimate the size of ILC. Breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is usually performed after initial cancer detection. In this setting, the sensitivity is approximately 96%. However, multiple cases have been reported in which ILC has been initially detected with MR imaging, thus implying a potential advantage of MR imaging over mammography in screening. The size of an ILC as reported on MR imaging correlates well with size at pathology (r = 0.89). Additional tumor foci are detected by MR imaging in approximately one-third of patients, and these foci are subsequently pathologically confirmed in 88%. Hence, preoperative MR imaging of ILC changes management in 28% of patients, often appropriately. Nevertheless, it is still essential to obtain histology prior to large changes in the therapeutic regime based on MR imaging findings, either by second-look ultrasound or by MR imaging-guided biopsy. Using this approach, it has been shown that preoperative MR imaging reduces the rate of reexcisions after breast-conserving surgery from 27% to 9%, without increasing the rate of mastectomies and without extending total therapy time. Finally, the early detection of contralateral carcinomas only visible at MR imaging in approximately 7% of patients with ILC implies that preoperative MR imaging in these patients improves survival, although the magnitude of this effect is unknown. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20494311     DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2010.02.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am        ISSN: 1064-9689            Impact factor:   2.266


  15 in total

1.  Which factors influence MRI-pathology concordance of tumour size measurements in breast cancer?

Authors:  M Rominger; D Berg; T Frauenfelder; A Ramaswamy; N Timmesfeld
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Current Status and New Developments in Breast MRI.

Authors:  Katja C Siegmann; Bernhard Krämer; Claus Claussen
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2011-04-29       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Relationship between parameters from virtual touch tissue quantification (VTQ) imaging with clinicopathologic prognostic factors in women with invasive ductal breast cancer.

Authors:  Juan Xie; Rong Wu; Hui-Xiong Xu; Ming-Hua Yao; Guang Xu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2014-09-15

4.  Multifocal, multicentric and contralateral breast cancers: breast MR imaging in the preoperative evaluation of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.

Authors:  V Girardi; G Carbognin; L Camera; I Baglio; A Bucci; F Bonetti; R Pozzi Mucelli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-07-09       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 5.  Current and future applications of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to breast and ovarian cancer patient management.

Authors:  Jim Klostergaard; Kenia Parga; Raphael G Raptis
Journal:  P R Health Sci J       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 0.705

6.  MRI-guided core needle biopsy of the breast: Radiology-pathology correlation and impact on clinical management.

Authors:  Amy J Lilly; Meredith Johnson; Cherie M Kuzmiak; David W Ollila; Siobhan M O'Connor; Johann D Hertel; Benjamin C Calhoun
Journal:  Ann Diagn Pathol       Date:  2020-07-03       Impact factor: 2.090

Review 7.  Hereditary diffuse gastric cancer: updated clinical practice guidelines.

Authors:  Vanessa R Blair; Maybelle McLeod; Fátima Carneiro; Daniel G Coit; Johanna L D'Addario; Jolanda M van Dieren; Kirsty L Harris; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge; Carla Oliveira; Rachel S van der Post; Julie Arnold; Patrick R Benusiglio; Tanya M Bisseling; Alex Boussioutas; Annemieke Cats; Amanda Charlton; Karen E Chelcun Schreiber; Jeremy L Davis; Massimiliano di Pietro; Rebecca C Fitzgerald; James M Ford; Kimberley Gamet; Irene Gullo; Richard H Hardwick; David G Huntsman; Pardeep Kaurah; Sonia S Kupfer; Andrew Latchford; Paul F Mansfield; Takeshi Nakajima; Susan Parry; Jeremy Rossaak; Haruhiko Sugimura; Magali Svrcek; Marc Tischkowitz; Toshikazu Ushijima; Hidetaka Yamada; Han-Kwang Yang; Adrian Claydon; Joana Figueiredo; Karyn Paringatai; Raquel Seruca; Nicola Bougen-Zhukov; Tom Brew; Simone Busija; Patricia Carneiro; Lynn DeGregorio; Helen Fisher; Erin Gardner; Tanis D Godwin; Katharine N Holm; Bostjan Humar; Caroline J Lintott; Elizabeth C Monroe; Mark D Muller; Enrique Norero; Yasmin Nouri; Joana Paredes; João M Sanches; Emily Schulpen; Ana S Ribeiro; Andrew Sporle; James Whitworth; Liying Zhang; Anthony E Reeve; Parry Guilford
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 41.316

8.  Evolving concepts in breast lobular neoplasia and invasive lobular carcinoma, and their impact on imaging methods.

Authors:  Tatiane M G Oliveira; Jorge Elias; Andrea F Melo; Sara R Teixeira; Salomão C Filho; Larissa M Gonçalves; Francesca M Faria; Daniel G Tiezzi; Jurandyr M Andrade; Valdair Muglia
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2014-03-16

9.  The biology of malignant breast tumors has an impact on the presentation in ultrasound: an analysis of 315 cases.

Authors:  S Wojcinski; N Stefanidou; P Hillemanns; F Degenhardt
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 2.809

10.  Accuracy of Preoperative Breast MRI Versus Conventional Imaging in Measuring Pathologic Extent of Invasive Lobular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Keegan K Hovis; Janie M Lee; Daniel S Hippe; Hannah Linden; Meghan R Flanagan; Mark R Kilgore; Janis Yee; Savannah C Partridge; Habib Rahbar
Journal:  J Breast Imaging       Date:  2021-04-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.