Geunwon Kim1, Peter G Mikhael1, Tawakalitu O Oseni2, Manisha Bahl3. 1. Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, WAC 240, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Division of Breast Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, WAC 240, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. mbahl1@mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare upgrade rates of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on digital mammography (DM) versus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and identify patient, imaging, and pathological features associated with upgrade risk. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 318 women (mean 59 years, range 37-89) with screening-detected DCIS from 2007 to 2011 (DM group) and from 2013 to 2016 (DBT group). Comparisons made between DM and DBT groups using the unpaired t test and chi-square test include detection rates of DCIS, upgrade rates to invasive cancer, and pathological features of DCIS and upgraded cases. Patient, imaging, and pathological features associated with upgrade were also determined. P values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in detection rates of DCIS between DM and DBT groups (0.9 versus 1.0 per 1000 examinations, p = 0.45). Upgrade rates of DCIS to invasive cancer in DM and DBT groups were similar (17.3% versus 16.8%, p = 0.90), despite significant differences in pathological features of DCIS between DM and DBT groups (including nuclear grade, comedonecrosis, and progesterone receptor status [p ≤ 0.01]). Among upgraded cases, a higher proportion were high-grade invasive cancers with DBT (36.7% versus 9.5%, p = 0.03). In both groups, ultrasound-guided (versus stereotactic) biopsy was associated with higher upgrade risk (p ≤ 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in detection rates or upgrade rates of DCIS on DM versus DBT; however, upgraded cases were more likely to be high grade with DBT, suggesting possible differences in tumor biology between cancers with DM and DBT. In both DM and DBT groups, biopsy modality was associated with upgrade risk. KEY POINTS: • Detection rates and upgrade rates of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on digital mammography (DM) versus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) are similar. • A higher proportion of upgraded cases were high-grade invasive cancers with DBT than DM, suggesting possible differences in tumor biology between cancers that are detected with DM and DBT. • With both DM and DBT, ultrasound-guided biopsy (versus stereotactic biopsy) was associated with a higher risk of upgrade.
OBJECTIVES: To compare upgrade rates of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on digital mammography (DM) versus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and identify patient, imaging, and pathological features associated with upgrade risk. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 318 women (mean 59 years, range 37-89) with screening-detected DCIS from 2007 to 2011 (DM group) and from 2013 to 2016 (DBT group). Comparisons made between DM and DBT groups using the unpaired t test and chi-square test include detection rates of DCIS, upgrade rates to invasive cancer, and pathological features of DCIS and upgraded cases. Patient, imaging, and pathological features associated with upgrade were also determined. P values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in detection rates of DCIS between DM and DBT groups (0.9 versus 1.0 per 1000 examinations, p = 0.45). Upgrade rates of DCIS to invasive cancer in DM and DBT groups were similar (17.3% versus 16.8%, p = 0.90), despite significant differences in pathological features of DCIS between DM and DBT groups (including nuclear grade, comedonecrosis, and progesterone receptor status [p ≤ 0.01]). Among upgraded cases, a higher proportion were high-grade invasive cancers with DBT (36.7% versus 9.5%, p = 0.03). In both groups, ultrasound-guided (versus stereotactic) biopsy was associated with higher upgrade risk (p ≤ 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in detection rates or upgrade rates of DCIS on DM versus DBT; however, upgraded cases were more likely to be high grade with DBT, suggesting possible differences in tumor biology between cancers with DM and DBT. In both DM and DBT groups, biopsy modality was associated with upgrade risk. KEY POINTS: • Detection rates and upgrade rates of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on digital mammography (DM) versus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) are similar. • A higher proportion of upgraded cases were high-grade invasive cancers with DBT than DM, suggesting possible differences in tumor biology between cancers that are detected with DM and DBT. • With both DM and DBT, ultrasound-guided biopsy (versus stereotactic biopsy) was associated with a higher risk of upgrade.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Digital breast tomosynthesis; Digital mammography; Ductal carcinoma in situ
Authors: Mariam Shehata; Lars Grimm; Nancy Ballantyne; Ana Lourenco; Linda R Demello; Mark R Kilgore; Habib Rahbar Journal: J Breast Imaging Date: 2019-08-18
Authors: Amit Goyal; Anthony Douglas-Jones; Ian Monypenny; Helen Sweetland; Guy Stevens; Robert E Mansel Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2006-03-22 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Larissa C Marques; Gustavo Nader Marta; Juliana Z de Andrade; Danúbia Andrade; Alfredo C S D de Barros; Felipe E M Andrade Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2019-01-14 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: E Shelley Hwang; Terry Hyslop; Thomas Lynch; Elizabeth Frank; Donna Pinto; Desiree Basila; Deborah Collyar; Antonia Bennett; Celia Kaplan; Shoshana Rosenberg; Alastair Thompson; Anna Weiss; Ann Partridge Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 2.692