Martina Džoić Dominković1,2, Gordana Ivanac3, Tomislav Kelava4,5, Boris Brkljačić3. 1. Department of Radiology, General Hospital Orašje, III ulica bb, Orašje, Bosnia and Herzegovina. martina.dzoic@gmail.com. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital "Dubrava", University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Avenija Gojka Šuška 6, Zagreb, Croatia. martina.dzoic@gmail.com. 3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital "Dubrava", University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Avenija Gojka Šuška 6, Zagreb, Croatia. 4. Department of Physiology and Immunology, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia. 5. Laboratory for Molecular Immunology, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Salata 3, Zagreb, Croatia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate shear-wave elastographic (SWE) features of triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) and determine useful discriminators from other types of invasive breast cancers. METHODS: SWE features of 26 TNBC were reviewed and compared to 32 non-TNBC. Qualitative SWE features of lesion colour appearance, shape and homogeneity were analysed. Quantitative features were measured: mean (El mean), maximum (El max) and minimum (El min) elasticity value of the stiffest portion of the mass, mean elasticity of the surrounding tissue (El mean surr) and lesion to fat elasticity ratio (E ratio). RESULTS: TNBC are more often regularly shaped (57.7 % vs. 6.2 %), while non-TNBC are more commonly red (93.7 % vs 42.3 %) and heterogeneous (68.7 % vs 42.3 %). The stiffness of TNBC is significantly lower compared to non-TNBC. The two groups could be distinguished on the basis of El max (p = 0.001), El mean (p = 0.001), El min (p = 0.001) and E ratio (p = 0.0017). Lesion to fat elasticity ratio in TNBC group was statistically significantly lower than in the non-TNBC control group (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: TNBC often demonstrate benign morphological features, are softer on SWE and have a lower lesion to fat stiffness ratio compared to the other, more common types of invasive breast cancers. KEY POINTS: • TNBC often demonstrate benign morphological features on SWE. • TNBC present on elastography mostly as red, regularly shaped, heterogeneous lesions. • TNBC are less stiff compared to other invasive breast cancers. • TNBC have lower lesion to fat stiffness ratio than other breast cancers.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate shear-wave elastographic (SWE) features of triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) and determine useful discriminators from other types of invasive breast cancers. METHODS: SWE features of 26 TNBC were reviewed and compared to 32 non-TNBC. Qualitative SWE features of lesion colour appearance, shape and homogeneity were analysed. Quantitative features were measured: mean (El mean), maximum (El max) and minimum (El min) elasticity value of the stiffest portion of the mass, mean elasticity of the surrounding tissue (El mean surr) and lesion to fat elasticity ratio (E ratio). RESULTS: TNBC are more often regularly shaped (57.7 % vs. 6.2 %), while non-TNBC are more commonly red (93.7 % vs 42.3 %) and heterogeneous (68.7 % vs 42.3 %). The stiffness of TNBC is significantly lower compared to non-TNBC. The two groups could be distinguished on the basis of El max (p = 0.001), El mean (p = 0.001), El min (p = 0.001) and E ratio (p = 0.0017). Lesion to fat elasticity ratio in TNBC group was statistically significantly lower than in the non-TNBC control group (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: TNBC often demonstrate benign morphological features, are softer on SWE and have a lower lesion to fat stiffness ratio compared to the other, more common types of invasive breast cancers. KEY POINTS: • TNBC often demonstrate benign morphological features on SWE. • TNBC present on elastography mostly as red, regularly shaped, heterogeneous lesions. • TNBC are less stiff compared to other invasive breast cancers. • TNBC have lower lesion to fat stiffness ratio than other breast cancers.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast neoplasms; Elastic modulus; Elastography; Sonoelastography; Triple negative breast neoplasms
Authors: Wendie A Berg; David O Cosgrove; Caroline J Doré; Fritz K W Schäfer; William E Svensson; Regina J Hooley; Ralf Ohlinger; Ellen B Mendelson; Catherine Balu-Maestro; Martina Locatelli; Christophe Tourasse; Barbara C Cavanaugh; Valérie Juhan; A Thomas Stavros; Anne Tardivon; Joel Gay; Jean-Pierre Henry; Claude Cohen-Bacrie Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jung Min Chang; In Ae Park; Su Hyun Lee; Won Hwa Kim; Min Sun Bae; Hye Ryoung Koo; Ann Yi; Seung Ja Kim; Nariya Cho; Woo Kyung Moon Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Wei-Tse Yang; Mark Dryden; Kristine Broglio; Michael Gilcrease; Shaheenah Dawood; Peter J Dempsey; Vicente Valero; Gabriel Hortobagyi; Deann Atchley; Banu Arun Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2007-11-17 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Andrew Evans; Patsy Whelehan; Kim Thomson; Denis McLean; Katrin Brauer; Colin Purdie; Lee Jordan; Lee Baker; Alastair Thompson Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2010-12-01 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Martina Dzoic Dominkovic; Gordana Ivanac; Kristina Bojanic; Kristina Kralik; Martina Smolic; Eugen Divjak; Robert Smolic; Boris Brkljacic Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2020-06-10