Literature DB >> 24108552

Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breasts: review of MR imaging features.

Heather I Greenwood1, Samantha L Heller, Sungheon Kim, Eric E Sigmund, Sara D Shaylor, Linda Moy.   

Abstract

The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has increased over the past few decades and now accounts for over 20% of newly diagnosed cases of breast cancer. Although the detection of DCIS has increased with the advent of widespread mammography screening, it is essential to have a more accurate assessment of the extent of DCIS for successful breast conservation therapy. Recent studies evaluating the detection of DCIS with magnetic resonance (MR) imaging have used high spatial resolution techniques and have increasingly been performed to screen a high-risk population as well as to evaluate the extent of disease. This work has shown that MR imaging is the most sensitive modality currently available for identifying DCIS and is more accurate than mammography in evaluating the extent of DCIS. MR imaging is particularly sensitive for identifying high-grade and intermediate-grade DCIS. DCIS may have variable morphologic features on MR images, with non-mass enhancement morphology being the most common manifestation. Less commonly, DCIS may also manifest as a mass on MR images, in which case it is most likely to be irregular. The kinetics of DCIS are also variable, with fast uptake and a plateau curve reported as the most common kinetic pattern. Additional MR imaging tools such as diffusion-weighted imaging and quantitative kinetic analysis combined with the benefit of high field strength, such as 3 T, may increase the sensitivity and specificity of breast MR imaging in the detection of DCIS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24108552     DOI: 10.1148/rg.336125055

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiographics        ISSN: 0271-5333            Impact factor:   5.333


  25 in total

1.  Value of pre-operative breast MRI for the size assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ.

Authors:  Francesca Proulx; José A Correa; Romuald Ferré; Atilla Omeroglu; Ann Aldis; Sarkis Meterissian; Benoît Mesurolle
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-11-16       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Computer-aided evaluation as an adjunct to revised BI-RADS Atlas: improvement in positive predictive value at screening breast MRI.

Authors:  Hye Mi Gweon; Nariya Cho; Mirinae Seo; A Jung Chu; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-05-02       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  US and MRI in the evaluation of mammographic BI-RADS 4 and 5 microcalcifications.

Authors:  Ana Hrkac Pustahija; Gordana Ivanac; Boris Brkljacic
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 4.  Current Therapeutic Approaches to DCIS.

Authors:  Kaleigh Doke; Shirley Butler; Melissa P Mitchell
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 2.673

5.  MRI accurately identifies early murine mammary cancers and reliably differentiates between in situ and invasive cancer: correlation of MRI with histology.

Authors:  Devkumar Mustafi; Marta Zamora; Xiaobing Fan; Erica Markiewicz; Jeffrey Mueller; Suzanne D Conzen; Gregory S Karczmar
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 4.044

6.  Clinics in diagnostic imaging (180). Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

Authors:  Eu Jin Tan; Tammy Hui Lin Moey; Preetha Madhukumar; Lester Chee Hao Leong
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.858

7.  Heterogeneity of triple-negative breast cancer: mammographic, US, and MR imaging features according to androgen receptor expression.

Authors:  Min Sun Bae; So Yeon Park; Sung Eun Song; Won Hwa Kim; Su Hyun Lee; Wonshik Han; In-Ae Park; Dong-Young Noh; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Factors Affecting Image Quality and Lesion Evaluability in Breast Diffusion-weighted MRI: Observations from the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group Multisite Trial (A6702).

Authors:  Jennifer G Whisenant; Justin Romanoff; Habib Rahbar; Averi E Kitsch; Sara M Harvey; Linda Moy; Wendy B DeMartini; Basak E Dogan; Wei T Yang; Lilian C Wang; Bonnie N Joe; Lisa J Wilmes; Nola M Hylton; Karen Y Oh; Luminita A Tudorica; Colleen H Neal; Dariya I Malyarenko; Elizabeth S McDonald; Christopher E Comstock; Thomas E Yankeelov; Thomas L Chenevert; Savannah C Partridge
Journal:  J Breast Imaging       Date:  2020-12-24

Review 9.  Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of pathologic nipple discharge: indications and imaging findings.

Authors:  Naziya Samreen; Laura B Madsen; Celin Chacko; Samantha L Heller
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  Differentiation between Clinically Noninflammatory Granulomatous Lobular Mastitis and Noncalcified Ductal Carcinoma in situ Using Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Ning Qu; Yahong Luo; Tao Yu
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 2.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.