Niloofar Karbasian1, Sahand Sohrabi2, Toma S Omofoye3, Huong Le-Petross3, Banu K Arun4, Constance T Albarracin5, Kenneth R Hess6, Angelica M Gutierrez-Barrera4, Gary J Whitman7. 1. Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 2. Department of Radiology, Kaiser Permanente of Northern California, Sacramento, CA. 3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 4. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 5. Department of Anatomical Pathology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 6. Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 7. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. Electronic address: gwhitman@mdanderson.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to review the mammographic and the ultrasound features of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients and to investigate the potential effect of BRCA mutations on the imaging features of these patients. METHODS: One hundred and seven patients with TNBC were enrolled in a retrospective study following IRB approval and approval of waiver of informed consent. BRCA mutations were assessed using genetic testing. Imaging features on mammography and ultrasound (US) as well as pathology and clinical information were retrospectively reviewed and characterized according to the BI-RADS lexicon (fifth edition). The relationships between BRCA mutations and the imaging findings were examined. RESULTS: TNBC commonly presented as an irregular mass with obscured margins on mammography and as an irregular hypoechoic mass with microlobulated or angular margins on US. Approximately two thirds of TNBC cases had a parallel orientation and approximately one third had posterior enhancement, features often associated with benign masses. There was no statistically significant difference in the mammographic and the US features of BRCA positive and BRCA negative triple negative tumors. CONCLUSION: TNBC may have a parallel orientation and posterior enhancement, which are features often seen with benign masses. BRCA mutations do not affect the imaging features of triple negative breast tumors.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to review the mammographic and the ultrasound features of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients and to investigate the potential effect of BRCA mutations on the imaging features of these patients. METHODS: One hundred and seven patients with TNBC were enrolled in a retrospective study following IRB approval and approval of waiver of informed consent. BRCA mutations were assessed using genetic testing. Imaging features on mammography and ultrasound (US) as well as pathology and clinical information were retrospectively reviewed and characterized according to the BI-RADS lexicon (fifth edition). The relationships between BRCA mutations and the imaging findings were examined. RESULTS: TNBC commonly presented as an irregular mass with obscured margins on mammography and as an irregular hypoechoic mass with microlobulated or angular margins on US. Approximately two thirds of TNBC cases had a parallel orientation and approximately one third had posterior enhancement, features often associated with benign masses. There was no statistically significant difference in the mammographic and the US features of BRCA positive and BRCA negative triple negative tumors. CONCLUSION: TNBC may have a parallel orientation and posterior enhancement, which are features often seen with benign masses. BRCA mutations do not affect the imaging features of triple negative breast tumors.
Authors: Rebecca Dent; Maureen Trudeau; Kathleen I Pritchard; Wedad M Hanna; Harriet K Kahn; Carol A Sawka; Lavina A Lickley; Ellen Rawlinson; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Kristin M Krizmanich-Conniff; Chintana Paramagul; Stephanie K Patterson; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Jamie D Myles; Kiting Jiang; Michael Sabel Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Huong T Le-Petross; Gary J Whitman; Deanne P Atchley; Ying Yuan; Angelica Gutierrez-Barrera; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Jennifer K Litton; Banu K Arun Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-03-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: S R Young; Robert T Pilarski; Talia Donenberg; Charles Shapiro; Lyn S Hammond; Judith Miller; Karen A Brooks; Stephanie Cohen; Beverly Tenenholz; Damini Desai; Inuk Zandvakili; Robert Royer; Song Li; Steven A Narod Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2009-03-19 Impact factor: 4.430