Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Cancer
Published in: BMC Cancer 1/2011

Open Access 01-12-2011 | Research article

High-frequency ultrasound for intraoperative margin assessments in breast conservation surgery: a feasibility study

Authors: Timothy E Doyle, Rachel E Factor, Christina L Ellefson, Kristina M Sorensen, Brady J Ambrose, Jeffrey B Goodrich, Vern P Hart, Scott C Jensen, Hemang Patel, Leigh A Neumayer

Published in: BMC Cancer | Issue 1/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In addition to breast imaging, ultrasound offers the potential for characterizing and distinguishing between benign and malignant breast tissues due to their different microstructures and material properties. The aim of this study was to determine if high-frequency ultrasound (20-80 MHz) can provide pathology sensitive measurements for the ex vivo detection of cancer in margins during breast conservation surgery.

Methods

Ultrasonic tests were performed on resected margins and other tissues obtained from 17 patients, resulting in 34 specimens that were classified into 15 pathology categories. Pulse-echo and through-transmission measurements were acquired from a total of 57 sites on the specimens using two single-element 50-MHz transducers. Ultrasonic attenuation and sound speed were obtained from time-domain waveforms. The waveforms were further processed with fast Fourier transforms to provide ultrasonic spectra and cepstra. The ultrasonic measurements and pathology types were analyzed for correlations. The specimens were additionally re-classified into five pathology types to determine specificity and sensitivity values.

Results

The density of peaks in the ultrasonic spectra, a measure of spectral structure, showed significantly higher values for carcinomas and precancerous pathologies such as atypical ductal hyperplasia than for normal tissue. The slopes of the cepstra for non-malignant pathologies displayed significantly greater values that differentiated them from the normal and malignant tissues. The attenuation coefficients were sensitive to fat necrosis, fibroadenoma, and invasive lobular carcinoma. Specificities and sensitivities for differentiating pathologies from normal tissue were 100% and 86% for lobular carcinomas, 100% and 74% for ductal carcinomas, 80% and 82% for benign pathologies, and 80% and 100% for fat necrosis and adenomas. Specificities and sensitivities were also determined for differentiating each pathology type from the other four using a multivariate analysis. The results yielded specificities and sensitivities of 85% and 86% for lobular carcinomas, 85% and 74% for ductal carcinomas, 100% and 61% for benign pathologies, 84% and 100% for fat necrosis and adenomas, and 98% and 80% for normal tissue.

Conclusions

Results from high-frequency ultrasonic measurements of human breast tissue specimens indicate that characteristics in the ultrasonic attenuation, spectra, and cepstra can be used to differentiate between normal, benign, and malignant breast pathologies.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Anscher MS, Jones P, Prosnitz LR, Blackstock W, Hebert M, Reddick R, Tucker A, Dodge R, Leight G, Iglehart JD, Rosenman J: Local failure and margin status in early-stage breast carcinoma treated with conservation surgery and radiation therapy. Annals of Surgery. 1993, 218: 22-28. 10.1097/00000658-199307000-00005.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Roukos DH, Kappas AM, Agnantis NJ: Perspectives and risks of breast-conservation therapy for breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003, 10: 718-721. 10.1245/ASO.2003.05.925.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Moore MM, Borossa G, Imbrie JZ, Fechner RE, Harvey JA, Slingluff CL, Adams RB, Hanks JB: Association of infiltrating lobular carcinoma with positive surgical margins after breast-conservation therapy. Annals of Surgery. 2000, 231: 877-882. 10.1097/00000658-200006000-00012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
Moore MM, Whitney LA, Cerilli L, Imbrie JZ, Bunch M, Simpson VB, Hanks JB: Intraoperative ultrasound is associated with clear lumpectomy margins for palpable infiltrating ductal breast cancer. Annals of Surgery. 2001, 233: 761-768. 10.1097/00000658-200106000-00005.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Cabioglu N, Hunt KK, Sahin AA, Kuerer HM, Babiera GV, Singletary SE, Whitman GJ, Ross MI, Ames FC, Feig BW, Buchholz TA, Meric-Bernstam F: Role for intraoperative margin assessment in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007, 14: 1458-1471. 10.1245/s10434-006-9236-0.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Dick AW, Sorbero MS, Ahrendt GM, Hayman JA, Gold HT, Schiffhauer L, Stark A, Griggs JJ: Comparative effectiveness of ductal carcinoma in situ management and the roles of margins and surgeons. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011, 103: 92-104. 10.1093/jnci/djq499.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Shimauchi A, Yamada T, Sato A, Takase K, Usami S, Ishida T, Moriya T, Takahashi S: Comparison of MDCT and MRI for evaluating the intraductal component of breast cancer. Amer J Roentgenology. 2006, 187: 322-329. 10.2214/AJR.05.0876.CrossRef
8.
Olsha O, Shemesh S, Carmon M, Sibirsky O, Dalo RA, Rivkin L, Ashkenazi I: Resection margins in ultrasound-guided breast-conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011, 18: 447-452. 10.1245/s10434-010-1280-0.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Fitzgerald AJ, Wallace VP, Jimenez-Linan M, Bobrow L, Pye RJ, Purushotham AD, Arnone DD: Terahertz pulsed imaging of human breast tumors. Radiology. 2006, 239: 533-540. 10.1148/radiol.2392041315.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Haka AS, Volynskaya Z, Gardecki JA, Nazemi J, Lyons J, Hicks D, Fitzmaurice M, Dasari RR, Crowe JP, Feld MS: In vivo margin assessment during partial mastectomy breast surgery using Raman spectroscopy. Cancer Res. 2006, 66: 3317-3322. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-2815.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Nguyen F, Zysk AM, Chaney EJ, Kotynek JG, Oliphant UJ, Bellafiore FJ, Rowland KM, Johnson PA, Boppart SA: Intraoperative evaluation of breast tumor margins with optical coherence tomography. Cancer Res. 2009, 69: 8790-8796. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-4340.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Kennedy S, Geradts J, Bydlon T, Brown JQ, Gallagher J, Junker M, Barry W, Ramanujam N, Wilke L: Optical breast cancer margin assessment: an observational study of the effects of tissue heterogeneity on optical contrast. Breast Cancer Research. 2010, 12: R91-10.1186/bcr2770.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Lizzi FL, Greenebaum M, Feleppa EJ, Elbaum M, Coleman DJ: Theoretical framework for spectrum analysis in ultrasonic tissue characterization. J Acoust Soc Am. 1983, 73: 1366-1373. 10.1121/1.389241.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Lizzi FL, Astor M, Feleppa EJ, Shao M, Kalisz A: Statistical framework for ultrasonic spectral parameter imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1997, 23: 1371-1382. 10.1016/S0301-5629(97)00200-7.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Insana MF: Modeling acoustic backscatter from kidney microstructure using an anisotropic correlation function. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995, 97: 649-655. 10.1121/1.412287.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Rose JH, Kaufmann MR, Wickline SA, Hall CS, Miller JG: A proposed microscopic elastic wave theory for ultrasonic backscatter from myocardial tissue. J Acoust Soc Am. 1995, 97: 656-668. 10.1121/1.412288.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Hunt JW, Worthington AE, Xuan A, Kolios MC, Czarnota GJ, Sherar MD: A model based upon pseudo regular spacing of cells combined with the randomization of the nuclei can explain the significant changes in high-frequency ultrasound signals during apoptosis. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2002, 28: 217-226. 10.1016/S0301-5629(01)00494-X.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Oelze ML, Zachary JF, O'Brien WD: Characterization of tissue microstructure using ultrasonic backscatter: Theory and technique for optimization using a Gaussian form factor. J Acoust Soc Am. 2002, 112: 1202-1211. 10.1121/1.1501278.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Oelze ML, O'Brien WD, Zachary JF: Quantitative ultrasound assessment of breast cancer using a multiparameter approach. 2007 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium: 28-31 October 2007; New York. Edited by: Yuhas MP. 2007, Piscataway: IEEE, 981-984.CrossRef
20.
Bige Y, Hanfeng Z, Rong W: Analysis of microstructural alterations of normal and pathological breast tissue in vivo using the AR cepstrum. Ultrasonics. 2006, 44: 211-215. 10.1016/j.ultras.2005.11.001.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Oelze ML, O'Brien WD: Application of three scattering models to characterization of solid tumors in mice. Ultrason Imaging. 2006, 28: 83-96.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Oelze ML, Zachary JF: Examination of cancer in mouse models using high-frequency quantitative ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2006, 32: 1639-1648. 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.05.006.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Savéry D, Cloutier G: High-frequency ultrasound backscattering by blood: Analytical and semianalytical models of the erythrocyte cross section. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007, 121: 3963-3971. 10.1121/1.2715452.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Mamou J, Oelze ML, O'Brien WD, Zachary JF: Extended three-dimensional impedance map methods for identifying ultrasonic scattering sites. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008, 123: 1195-1208. 10.1121/1.2822658.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Huang SW, Li PC: Ultrasonic computed tomography reconstruction of the attenuation coefficient using a linear array. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2005, 52: 2011-2022.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Li C, Duric N, Huang L: Breast imaging using transmission ultrasound: reconstructing tissue parameters of sound speed and attenuation. 2008 International Conference on BioMedical Engineering and Informatics: 27-30 May 2008; Sanya, China. Edited by: Peng Y, Zhang Y. 2008, Piscataway: IEEE, 708-712.CrossRef
27.
Jeong JW, Shin DC, Do SH, Blanco C, Klipfel NE, Holmes DR, Hovanessian-Larsen LJ, Marmarelis VZ: Differentiation of cancerous lesions in excised human breast specimens using multiband attenuation profiles from ultrasonic transmission tomography. J Ultrasound Med. 2008, 27: 435-451.PubMed
28.
Baddour RE, Sherar MD, Hunt JW, Czarnota GJ, Kolios MC: High-frequency ultrasound scattering from microspheres and single cells. J Acoust Soc Am. 2005, 117: 934-943. 10.1121/1.1830668.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Taggart LR, Baddour RE, Giles A, Czarnota GJ, Kolios MC: Ultrasonic characterization of whole cells and isolated nuclei. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007, 33: 389-401. 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.07.037.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Brand S, Solanki B, Foster DB, Czarnota GJ, Kolios MC: Monitoring of cell death in epithelial cells using high frequency ultrasound spectroscopy. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2009, 35: 482-493. 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2008.09.014.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Czarnota GJ, Kolios MC, Abraham J, Portnoy M, Ottensmeyer FP, Hunt JW, Sherar MD: Ultrasound imaging of apoptosis: high-resolution non-invasive monitoring of programmed cell death in vitro, in situ, and in vivo. Br J Cancer. 1999, 81: 520-527. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6690724.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Banihashemi R, Vlad R, Debeljevic B, Giles A, Kolios MC, Czarnota GJ: Ultrasound imaging of apoptosis in tumor response: Novel preclinical monitoring of photodynamic therapy effects. Cancer Res. 2008, 68: 8590-8596. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-0006.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Vlad RM, Kolios MC, Moseley JL, Czarnota GJ, Brock KK: Evaluating the extent of cell death in 3D high frequency ultrasound by registration with whole-mount tumor histopathology. Med Phys. 2010, 37: 4288-4297. 10.1118/1.3459020.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Doyle TE, Patel H, Goodrich JB, Kwon S, Ambrose BJ, Pearson LH: Ultrasonic differentiation of normal versus malignant breast epithelial cells in monolayer cultures. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010, 128: EL229-EL235. 10.1121/1.3499699.PubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Bruno I, Kumon RE, Heartwell B, Maeva E, Maev RGr: Ex vivo breast tissue imaging and characterization using acoustic microscopy. Acoustical Imaging. Edited by: André MP. 2007, Dordrecht: Springer, 28: 279-287. 10.1007/1-4020-5721-0_29.CrossRef
36.
Doyle TE, Warnick KH, Carruth BL: Histology-based simulations for the ultrasonic detection of microscopic cancer in vivo. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007, 122: EL210-EL216. 10.1121/1.2800894.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Doyle TE, Tew AT, Warnick KH, Carruth BL: Simulation of elastic wave scattering in cells and tissues at the microscopic cancer level. J Acoust Soc Am. 2009, 125: 1751-1767.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Daoud MI, Lacefield JC: Stochastic modeling of normal and tumor tissue microstructure for high-frequency ultrasound imaging simulations. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2009, 56: 2806-2815.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Wear KA, Wagner RF, Insana MF, Hall TJ: Application of autoregressive spectral analysis to cepstral estimation of mean scatterer spacing. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 1993, 40: 50-58. 10.1109/58.184998.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Wear KA: Autocorrelation and cepstral methods for measurement of tibial cortical thickness. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2003, 50: 655-660.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Mamou J, Feleppa EJ: Singular spectrum analysis applied to ultrasonic detection and imaging of brachytherapy seeds. J Acoust Soc Am. 2007, 121: 1790-1801. 10.1121/1.2436713.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
42.
Lanfranchi ME: Breast Ultrasound. 2000, New York: Marban Books, 2
43.
Sakr RA, Poulet B, Kaufman GJ, Nos C, Clough KB: Clear margins for invasive lobular carcinoma: a surgical challenge. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011, 37: 350-356. 10.1016/j.ejso.2011.01.010.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Henni AH, Schmitt C, Cloutier G: Three-dimensional transient and harmonic shear-wave scattering by a soft cylinder for dynamic vascular elastography. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008, 124: 2394-2405. 10.1121/1.2973194.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Klimberg VS, Westbrook KC, Korourian S: Use of touch preps for diagnosis and evaluations of surgical margins in breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 1998, 5: 220-226. 10.1007/BF02303776.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Valdes EK, Boolbol SK, Cohen JM, Feldman SM: Intra-operative touch preparation cytology; does it have a role in re-excision lumpectomy?. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007, 14: 1045-1050. 10.1245/s10434-006-9263-x.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Cendán JCD, Coco D, Copeland EM: Accuracy of intraoperative frozen-section analysis of breast cancer lumpectomy-bed margins. J Am Coll Surg. 2005, 201: 194-198. 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2005.03.014.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Olson TP, Harter J, Munoz A, Mahvi DM, Breslin T: Frozen section analysis for intraoperative margin assessment during breast-conserving surgery results in low rates of re-excision and local recurrence. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007, 14: 2953-2960. 10.1245/s10434-007-9437-1.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Pappo I, Spector R, Schindel A, Morgenstern S, Sandbank J, Leider LT, Schneebaum S, Lelcuk S, Karni T: Diagnostic performance of a novel device for real-time margin assessment in lumpectomy specimens. J Surg Res. 2010, 160: 277-281. 10.1016/j.jss.2009.02.025.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Haka AS, Volynskaya Z, Gardecki JA, Nazemi J, Shenk R, Wang N, Dasari RR, Fitzmaurice M, Feld MS: Diagnosing breast cancer using Raman spectroscopy: prospective analysis. J Biomed Opt. 2009, 14: 054023-10.1117/1.3247154.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
51.
Keller MD, Majumder SK, Kelley MC, Meszoely IM, Boulos FI, Olivares GM, Mahadevan-Jansen A: Autofluorescence and diffuse reflectance spectroscopy and spectral imaging for breast surgical margin analysis. Lasers Surg Med. 2010, 42: 15-23. 10.1002/lsm.20865.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
High-frequency ultrasound for intraoperative margin assessments in breast conservation surgery: a feasibility study
Authors
Timothy E Doyle
Rachel E Factor
Christina L Ellefson
Kristina M Sorensen
Brady J Ambrose
Jeffrey B Goodrich
Vern P Hart
Scott C Jensen
Hemang Patel
Leigh A Neumayer
Publication date
01-12-2011
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cancer / Issue 1/2011
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2407
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-11-444

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

BMC Cancer 1/2011 Go to the issue

Research article

A novel inhibitor of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α P3155 also modulates PI3K pathway and inhibits growth of prostate cancer cells

Research article

Income level and regional policies, underlying factors associated with unwarranted variations in conservative breast cancer surgery in Spain

Research article

The antiapoptotic gene survivin is highly expressed in human chondrosarcoma and promotes drug resistance in chondrosarcoma cells in vitro

Research article

Expression profile of the N-myc Downstream Regulated Gene 2 (NDRG2) in human cancers with focus on breast cancer

Research article

Childhood acute leukemias are frequent in Mexico City: descriptive epidemiology

Research article

Role of serum S100B and PET-CT in follow-up of patients with cutaneous melanoma
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits