Marco Moschetta1, Angela Sardaro2, Adriana Nitti2, Michele Telegrafo3, Nicola Maggialetti4, Arnaldo Scardapane2, Maria Chiara Brunese4, Valentina Lavelli5, Cristina Ferrari5. 1. DETO, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantations, Breast Care Unit, Aldo Moro University of Bari Medical School, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy. marco.moschetta@gmail.com. 2. DIM, Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, Section of Diagnostic Imaging, Aldo Moro University of Bari Medical School, Bari, Italy. 3. DETO, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantations, Breast Care Unit, Aldo Moro University of Bari Medical School, Piazza Giulio Cesare 11, 70124, Bari, Italy. 4. Department of Medicine and Health Sciences "V. Tiberio", University of Molise, Campobasso, Italy. 5. DIM, Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, Section of Nuclear Medicine, Aldo Moro University of Bari Medical School, Bari, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the role of ultrasound (US) in detecting and characterizing ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast and to investigate the correlation between ultrasonographic and biological features of DCIS. METHODS: In total, 171 patients (mean age 44; range 39-62) with 178 lesions were retrospectively evaluated by two independent radiologists searching for US mass or non-mass lesions. Immunohistochemistry analysis was performed to determine estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression. The US detection rate and pattern distribution among the lesion types were evaluated. The χ2 test was used to evaluate the correlation between the US findings and the biological factors. Statistical significance was indicated by p values < 0.05. Inter-observer agreement was calculated by Kohen's k test. RESULTS: US detected 35% (63/178) of all lesions. Fifty-two (83%) lesions were classified as mass lesions, and 11 (17%) as non-mass lesions (p < 0.0001). Among the mass lesions, the most common shape was irregular (79%; p < 0.0001), with 45 (87%) lesions having indistinct margins. Hypoechogenicity was the most common echo pattern (49 cases, 94%; p < 0.0001). Microcalcifications were found in 23 cases (37%; p = 0.004) and were associated with mass lesions in 15 cases (65%) and with non-mass lesions in 8 cases (35%) (p = 0.21). An almost perfect inter-observer agreement (k = 0.87) was obtained between the two radiologists. A significant ER expression was found in mass lesions (83%; p < 0.0001), with no significant PR (p = 0.89) or HER2 expression (p = 0.81). Among the lesions with microcalcifications, only 7 out of 23 cases (30%) were positive for HER2 (p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: DCIS represents a heterogeneous pathological process with variable US appearance (mass-like, non-mass-like, or occult). The most common US finding is represented by mass-type, hypoechogenic lesions with indistinct margins. A significant ER expression exists among mass-type lesions, while microcalcifications seem not to be associated with HER2 expression.
PURPOSE: To assess the role of ultrasound (US) in detecting and characterizing ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast and to investigate the correlation between ultrasonographic and biological features of DCIS. METHODS: In total, 171 patients (mean age 44; range 39-62) with 178 lesions were retrospectively evaluated by two independent radiologists searching for US mass or non-mass lesions. Immunohistochemistry analysis was performed to determine estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression. The US detection rate and pattern distribution among the lesion types were evaluated. The χ2 test was used to evaluate the correlation between the US findings and the biological factors. Statistical significance was indicated by p values < 0.05. Inter-observer agreement was calculated by Kohen's k test. RESULTS: US detected 35% (63/178) of all lesions. Fifty-two (83%) lesions were classified as mass lesions, and 11 (17%) as non-mass lesions (p < 0.0001). Among the mass lesions, the most common shape was irregular (79%; p < 0.0001), with 45 (87%) lesions having indistinct margins. Hypoechogenicity was the most common echo pattern (49 cases, 94%; p < 0.0001). Microcalcifications were found in 23 cases (37%; p = 0.004) and were associated with mass lesions in 15 cases (65%) and with non-mass lesions in 8 cases (35%) (p = 0.21). An almost perfect inter-observer agreement (k = 0.87) was obtained between the two radiologists. A significant ER expression was found in mass lesions (83%; p < 0.0001), with no significant PR (p = 0.89) or HER2 expression (p = 0.81). Among the lesions with microcalcifications, only 7 out of 23 cases (30%) were positive for HER2 (p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: DCIS represents a heterogeneous pathological process with variable US appearance (mass-like, non-mass-like, or occult). The most common US finding is represented by mass-type, hypoechogenic lesions with indistinct margins. A significant ER expression exists among mass-type lesions, while microcalcifications seem not to be associated with HER2 expression.
Authors: Harold J Burstein; Kornelia Polyak; Julia S Wong; Susan C Lester; Carolyn M Kaelin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-04-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Karina Pesce; Fernando Binder; María José Chico; María Paz Swiecicki; Diana Herbas Galindo; Sergio Terrasa Journal: J Ultrasound Date: 2020-06-11
Authors: Hee Jung Shin; Hak Hee Kim; Sun Mi Kim; Gui Young Kwon; Gyungyub Gong; On Koo Cho Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: D Craig Allred; Stewart J Anderson; Soonmyung Paik; D Lawrence Wickerham; Iris D Nagtegaal; Sandra M Swain; Elefetherios P Mamounas; Thomas B Julian; Charles E Geyer; Joseph P Costantino; Stephanie R Land; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-03-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Marion E Scoggins; Patricia S Fox; Henry M Kuerer; Gaiane M Rauch; Ana P Benveniste; Young Mi Park; Sara A Lari; Savitri Krishnamurthy; Wei T Yang Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 3.959