Literature DB >> 25400785

Tumor size of breast invasive ductal cancer measured with contrast-enhanced ultrasound predicts regional lymph node metastasis and N stage.

Zhiyuan Wang1, Qichang Zhou2, Jun Liu3, Shichu Tang4, Xia Liang4, Zhengyu Zhou4, Ying He5, Hui Peng4, Yuanming Xiao6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the role of breast invasive ductal cancer (BIDC) size measured with Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the prediction of regional lymph node metastasis (LNM) and N stage.
METHODS: One hundred and six consecutive patients with breast lesions underwent ultrasound imaging within 2 weeks before mastectomy and axillary lymph node dissection. The largest transverse (width) and anteroposterior (depth) diameter were measured under CEUS by using calipers. The correlation between tumor size and regional LNM metastasis and N stage was evaluated.
RESULTS: Univariate analysis showed the diameters measured with CEUS were associated with lymph node metastasis (P < 0.05). The tumor size could distinguish grouped N stage (all P < 0.05). Tumor area (TA) might be an indicator that can differentiate No BIDC from N1-3 BIDC (cutoff = 5.37 cm(2)), N0-1 BIDC from N2-3 BIDC (cutoff = 6.48 cm(2)), and N0-2 BIDC from N3 BIDC (cutoff = 8.23 cm(2)) with the sensitivity of 71%, 72% and 83%, respectively, and the specificity of 79%, 68% and 84%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The TA of BIDC measured with CEUS may be a predictor of regional LNM and N stage.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast invasive ductal cancer; N stage; contrast-enhanced ultrasound; lymph node metastasis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25400785      PMCID: PMC4230066     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol        ISSN: 1936-2625


  19 in total

1.  Assessment of clinical palpation of the axilla as a criterion for performing the sentinel node procedure in breast cancer.

Authors:  C Lanng; J Hoffmann; H Galatius; U Engel
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2006-11-03       Impact factor: 4.424

2.  [The effect of mammographic screening on tumor size, axillary node status and the degree of histologic anaplasia].

Authors:  Zoltán Garami; Klára Benkó; Csaba Kósa; Balázs Fülöp; Géza Lukács
Journal:  Magy Seb       Date:  2006-10

3.  Ultrasound for accurate measurement of invasive breast cancer tumor size.

Authors:  Ashraf Shoma; Ahmed Moutamed; Mahmoud Ameen; Ali Abdelwahab
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.431

4.  Volumetric MR imaging of oral, maxillary sinus, oropharyngeal, and hypopharyngeal cancers: correlation between tumor volume and lymph node metastasis.

Authors:  Yasuo Kimura; Misa Sumi; Yoko Ichikawa; Yosuke Kawai; Takashi Nakamura
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Preoperative assessment of small tumours in women with breast cancer.

Authors:  B A Kald; P Boiesen; K Ronnow; P E Jonsson; T Bisgaard
Journal:  Scand J Surg       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.360

6.  Benign and malignant breast lesions: efficacy of real time contrast-enhanced ultrasound vs. magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  P Ricci; V Cantisani; L Ballesio; E Pagliara; E Sallusti; F M Drudi; F Trippa; F Calascibetta; S M Erturk; M Modesti; R Passariello
Journal:  Ultraschall Med       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 6.548

7.  Preoperative estimation of the pathological breast tumour size by physical examination, mammography and ultrasound: a prospective study on 105 invasive tumours.

Authors:  Anne M Bosch; Alfons G H Kessels; Geerard L Beets; Jan D Rupa; Dick Koster; Jos M A van Engelshoven; Maarten F von Meyenfeldt
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.528

8.  Tumor length as a prognostic factor in esophageal malignancy: univariate and multivariate survival analyses.

Authors:  Ewen A Griffiths; Zoe Brummell; Ganesh Gorthi; Susan A Pritchard; Ian McL Welch
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2006-03-15       Impact factor: 3.454

9.  Breast tumor size assessment: comparison of conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound.

Authors:  Yu-Xin Jiang; He Liu; Ji-Bin Liu; Qing-Li Zhu; Qiang Sun; Xiao-Yan Chang
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2007-08-08       Impact factor: 2.998

10.  Relative value of physical examination, mammography, and breast sonography in evaluating the size of the primary tumor and regional lymph node metastases in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast carcinoma.

Authors:  J Herrada; R B Iyer; E N Atkinson; N Sneige; A U Buzdar; G N Hortobagyi
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 12.531

View more
  4 in total

1.  Correlation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound features with prognostic factors in invasive ductal carcinomas of the breast.

Authors:  Jing Li; Mengxia Yuan; Lin Yang; Liping Guo
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2020-06-04       Impact factor: 2.374

Review 2.  Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography in the Diagnosis and Treatment Modulation of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Ioana Boca Bene; Sorin M Dudea; Anca I Ciurea
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-01-30

3.  Assessment of Additional MRI-Detected Breast Lesions Using the Quantitative Analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Scans and Its Comparability with Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI Findings of the Breast.

Authors:  Sei Young Lee; Ok Hee Woo; Hye Seon Shin; Sung Eun Song; Kyu Ran Cho; Bo Kyoung Seo; Soon Young Hwang
Journal:  Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi       Date:  2021-04-14

4.  Correlations of microvascular blood flow of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and HGF/c-Met signaling pathway with clinicopathological features and prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Peng-Hui Zhuang; Lei Xu; Lu Gao; Wei Lu; Li-Tao Ruan; Jin Yang
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 4.345

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.