Literature DB >> 26309697

Ultrasonographic findings of triple-negative breast cancer.

Hai-Yan Du1, Bao-Rong Lin2, Du-Ping Huang2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine whether triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) has distinguishing sonographic features compared to non-TNBC.
METHODS: Data from 145 consecutive breast cancer patients were collected. The images were reevaluated by two dedicated breast imaging experts according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. The sonographic features of 45 TNBC patients were compared with those of 100 non-TNBC patients.
RESULTS: TNBC showed a high histological tumor grade. On ultrasound, TNBC was more frequently to present as oval or round mass shape (48.9%, 17.8%; respectively), more likely to have circumscribed margins (82.2%), and less likely to show posterior attenuating (8.9%). Additionally, compared with non-TNBC, TNBC was less likely to have calcification (35.6%).
CONCLUSION: TNBC has distinguishing imaging features on breast ultrasound, and more likely to be associated with benign masses. Knowledge of the distinct sonographic features would be useful in diagnosing TNBC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Triple-negative breast cancer; sonographic features; ultrasound

Year:  2015        PMID: 26309697      PMCID: PMC4538191     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med        ISSN: 1940-5901


  21 in total

Review 1.  Ultrasonographic differentiation of malignant from benign breast lesions: a meta-analytic comparison of elasticity and BIRADS scoring.

Authors:  Gelareh Sadigh; Ruth C Carlos; Colleen H Neal; Ben A Dwamena
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-11-05       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 2.  Applications and literature review of the BI-RADS classification.

Authors:  S Obenauer; K P Hermann; E Grabbe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-01-26       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Triple-negative breast cancer: future prospects in diagnosis and management.

Authors:  Shereef Elsamany; Sakher Abdullah
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2014-01-05       Impact factor: 3.064

4.  Mammographic features of triple receptor-negative primary breast cancers in young premenopausal women.

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

5.  Comparison of triple-negative and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma using quantitative fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose/positron emission tomography imaging parameters: a potentially useful method for disease characterization.

Authors:  Sandip Basu; Wengen Chen; Julia Tchou; Ayse Mavi; Tevfik Cermik; Brian Czerniecki; Mitchell Schnall; Abass Alavi
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-03-01       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between imaging and pathological findings.

Authors:  Eun Sook Ko; Byung Hee Lee; Hyun-A Kim; Woo-Chul Noh; Min Suk Kim; Sang-Ah Lee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-11-07       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  Triple-negative breast cancer and the need for new therapeutic targets.

Authors:  Olav Engebraaten; Hans Kristian Moen Vollan; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2013-08-03       Impact factor: 4.307

Review 8.  Applications for breast magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Melissa Pilewskie; Monica Morrow
Journal:  Surg Oncol Clin N Am       Date:  2014-04-18       Impact factor: 3.495

9.  Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between MR imaging and pathologic findings.

Authors:  Takayoshi Uematsu; Masako Kasami; Sachiko Yuen
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Combined use of the automated breast volume scanner and the US elastography for the differentiation of benign from malignant lesions of the breast.

Authors:  Chaoli Xu; Shuping Wei; Yingdong Xie; Xiaoxiang Guan; Ninghua Fu; Pengfei Huang; Bin Yang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  4 in total

1.  Artificial intelligence system reduces false-positive findings in the interpretation of breast ultrasound exams.

Authors:  Yiqiu Shen; Farah E Shamout; Jamie R Oliver; Jan Witowski; Kawshik Kannan; Jungkyu Park; Nan Wu; Connor Huddleston; Stacey Wolfson; Alexandra Millet; Robin Ehrenpreis; Divya Awal; Cathy Tyma; Naziya Samreen; Yiming Gao; Chloe Chhor; Stacey Gandhi; Cindy Lee; Sheila Kumari-Subaiya; Cindy Leonard; Reyhan Mohammed; Christopher Moczulski; Jaime Altabet; James Babb; Alana Lewin; Beatriu Reig; Linda Moy; Laura Heacock; Krzysztof J Geras
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-09-24       Impact factor: 17.694

2.  Sonographic features that can be used to differentiate between small triple-negative breast cancer and fibroadenoma.

Authors:  Ga Young Yoon; Joo Hee Cha; Hak Hee Kim; Hee Jung Shin; Eun Young Chae; Woo Jung Choi
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2017-08-04

3.  Calcification, Posterior Acoustic, and Blood Flow: Ultrasonic Characteristics of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Kangjian Wang; Zongkai Zou; Haolin Shen; Guimei Huang; Shuping Yang
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 3.822

4.  Triple-negative invasive breast carcinoma: the association between the sonographic appearances with clinicopathological feature.

Authors:  Jia-Wei Li; Kai Zhang; Zhao-Ting Shi; Xun Zhang; Juan Xie; Jun-Ying Liu; Cai Chang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-06-13       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.