Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 3/2008

01-12-2008 | Preclinical Study

Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging, multidetector row computed tomography, ultrasonography, and mammography for tumor extension of breast cancer

Authors: Takayoshi Uematsu, Sachiko Yuen, Masako Kasami, Yoshihiro Uchida

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction Breast imaging modalities can assess the tumor extent and adequacy of excision, but there have been no reports comparing magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT), ultrasonography (US) and mammography (MMG) for the tumor extent of breast cancer. We prospectively assessed the accuracy of MR imaging, MDCT, US and MMG for preoperative assessment of the tumor extent of breast cancer. Methods Preoperative MR imaging, MDCT, US and MMG were performed for 210 breasts with breast cancer. The MR and MDCT images were independently interpreted by one of two radiologists with knowledge of the clinical and MMG findings. The US was performed with knowledge of the clinical and MMG findings by one of five US technologists. The correlation of the results of these examinations with histological findings was examined. Results Of the 210 index breast tumors, 210 (100%) could be detected on MR, 208 (99%) were detected on MDCT, 209 (99.5%) were detected on US, and 195 (93%) were detected on MMG. For evaluating local tumor extent, the accuracy of MR imaging (76%) was significantly higher than those of MDCT, US, and MMG (71%, 56%, and 52%, respectively) (P = 0.001, P < 0.0001, and P < 0.0001). MDCT was significantly more accurate than US (P < .0001) or MMG (P < .0001), and US was significantly more accurate than MMG (P = 0.004). MR imaging and US had substantial risk (11% and 17%) of overestimation of the tumor extent. Regarding ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), for non-comedo DCIS, the accuracies of MR imaging (89%), MDCT (72%), and US (61%) were significantly higher than the 22% accuracy of MMG (P < 0.0001, P = 0.012, and P = 0.016), but for comedo DCIS, there were no significant differences among the four breast imaging modalities. Conclusion MR imaging was the most accurate breast imaging modality for the tumor exten of breast cancer, although MR imaging had a substantial of risk of overestimation. MR imaging, MDCT and US can complement MMG for the preoperative evaluation of patients who are candidates for breast-conserving surgery.
Literature
1.
go back to reference NIH Cosensus Conference (1991) Treatment of early-stage breast cancer. J Am Med Assoc 265:391–395CrossRef NIH Cosensus Conference (1991) Treatment of early-stage breast cancer. J Am Med Assoc 265:391–395CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Vicini FA, Eberlein TL, Connolly JL, Recht A, Abner A, Schnitt SJ, Silen W, Harris JR (1991) The optimal extent of resection for patients with stages 1 or 2 breast cancer treated with conservative surgery and radiotherapy. Ann Sur 214:200–204CrossRef Vicini FA, Eberlein TL, Connolly JL, Recht A, Abner A, Schnitt SJ, Silen W, Harris JR (1991) The optimal extent of resection for patients with stages 1 or 2 breast cancer treated with conservative surgery and radiotherapy. Ann Sur 214:200–204CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Smitt MC, Nowels KW, Zdeblick MJ, Jeffrey S, Carlson RW, Stockdale FE, Goffinet DR (1995) The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long term results of breast conservation. Cancer 76:259–267PubMedCrossRef Smitt MC, Nowels KW, Zdeblick MJ, Jeffrey S, Carlson RW, Stockdale FE, Goffinet DR (1995) The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long term results of breast conservation. Cancer 76:259–267PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Gage I, Schnitt SJ, Nixon AJ, Silver B, Recht A, Troyan SL, Eberlein T, Love SM, Gelman R, Harris JR, Connolly JL (1996) Pathologic margin involvement and the risk of recurrence in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 78:1921–1928PubMedCrossRef Gage I, Schnitt SJ, Nixon AJ, Silver B, Recht A, Troyan SL, Eberlein T, Love SM, Gelman R, Harris JR, Connolly JL (1996) Pathologic margin involvement and the risk of recurrence in patients treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer 78:1921–1928PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Connolly JL, Boyages J, Nixon AJ, Peiro G, Gage I, Silver B, Recht A, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ (1998) Predictors of breast recurrence after conservative surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer. Mod Pathol 11:134–139PubMed Connolly JL, Boyages J, Nixon AJ, Peiro G, Gage I, Silver B, Recht A, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ (1998) Predictors of breast recurrence after conservative surgery and radiation therapy for invasive breast cancer. Mod Pathol 11:134–139PubMed
6.
go back to reference Morrow M, Schmidt R, Hassett C (1995) Patient selection for breast conservation therapy with magnification mammography. Surgery 118:621–626PubMedCrossRef Morrow M, Schmidt R, Hassett C (1995) Patient selection for breast conservation therapy with magnification mammography. Surgery 118:621–626PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Satake H, Shimamoto K, Sawaki A, Niimi R, Ishiguchi T, Ishigaki T, Yamakawa K, Nagasaka T, Funahashi H (2000) Role of ultrasonography in the detection of intraductal spread of breast cancer: correlation with pathologic findings, mammography and MR imaging. Eur Radiol 10:1726–1732PubMedCrossRef Satake H, Shimamoto K, Sawaki A, Niimi R, Ishiguchi T, Ishigaki T, Yamakawa K, Nagasaka T, Funahashi H (2000) Role of ultrasonography in the detection of intraductal spread of breast cancer: correlation with pathologic findings, mammography and MR imaging. Eur Radiol 10:1726–1732PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Hata T, Takahashi H, Watanabe K, Takahashi M, Taguchi K, Itoh T, Toda S (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: a comparative study with mammography and ultrasonography. J Am Coll Surg 198:190–197PubMedCrossRef Hata T, Takahashi H, Watanabe K, Takahashi M, Taguchi K, Itoh T, Toda S (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: a comparative study with mammography and ultrasonography. J Am Coll Surg 198:190–197PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, Ioffe OB (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849PubMedCrossRef Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, Ioffe OB (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Shiina M, Kobayashi S (2001) Three-dimensional helical CT of the breast: accuracy for measuring extent of breast cancer candidates for breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 65:249–257PubMedCrossRef Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Shiina M, Kobayashi S (2001) Three-dimensional helical CT of the breast: accuracy for measuring extent of breast cancer candidates for breast conserving surgery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 65:249–257PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Sato N (2004) Value of three-dimensional helical CT image-guided planning for made-to-order lumpectomy in breast cancer patients. Breast J 10:33–37PubMedCrossRef Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Sato N (2004) Value of three-dimensional helical CT image-guided planning for made-to-order lumpectomy in breast cancer patients. Breast J 10:33–37PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference American College of Radiology (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA American College of Radiology (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston, VA
13.
go back to reference Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Sato N (2002) Comparison between high-resolution helical CT and pathology in breast examination. Acta Radiol 43:385–390PubMedCrossRef Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Sato N (2002) Comparison between high-resolution helical CT and pathology in breast examination. Acta Radiol 43:385–390PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Egan RL (1982) Multicentric breast carcinomas: clinical-radiographic–pathologic whole organ studies and 10-year survival. Cancer 49:1123–1130PubMedCrossRef Egan RL (1982) Multicentric breast carcinomas: clinical-radiographic–pathologic whole organ studies and 10-year survival. Cancer 49:1123–1130PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Faverly DRG, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R (2001) Breast carcinomas of limited extend. Cancer 91:647–659PubMedCrossRef Faverly DRG, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R (2001) Breast carcinomas of limited extend. Cancer 91:647–659PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Moon WK, Myung FS, Lee YF, Park IA, Noh DY, Im FG (2002) US of ductal carcinoma in situ. RadioGraphics 22:269–281PubMed Moon WK, Myung FS, Lee YF, Park IA, Noh DY, Im FG (2002) US of ductal carcinoma in situ. RadioGraphics 22:269–281PubMed
17.
go back to reference Holland R, Hendriks JHCL, Mravunac M (1983) Mammographically occult breast cancer. Cancer 52:1810–1819PubMedCrossRef Holland R, Hendriks JHCL, Mravunac M (1983) Mammographically occult breast cancer. Cancer 52:1810–1819PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Menell JH, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Brogi E, Liberman L (2005) Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 6:382–390CrossRef Menell JH, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Brogi E, Liberman L (2005) Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 6:382–390CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Holland R, Hendriks JHCL, Verbeek ALM, Mravunac M, Stekhoven JHS (1990) Extent, distribution, and mammographic/histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 335:519–522PubMedCrossRef Holland R, Hendriks JHCL, Verbeek ALM, Mravunac M, Stekhoven JHS (1990) Extent, distribution, and mammographic/histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 335:519–522PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Krecke KN, Gisvold JJ (1993) Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic findings and extent of disease at diagnosis in 184 patients. Am J Roentgenol 161:957–960 Krecke KN, Gisvold JJ (1993) Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic findings and extent of disease at diagnosis in 184 patients. Am J Roentgenol 161:957–960
21.
go back to reference Butler RS, Venta LA, Wiley EL, Ellis RL, Dempsey PJ, Rubin E (1999) Sonographic evaluation of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 172:325–330 Butler RS, Venta LA, Wiley EL, Ellis RL, Dempsey PJ, Rubin E (1999) Sonographic evaluation of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 172:325–330
22.
go back to reference Schelfourt K, Goethem MV, Kersschot E, Verslegers I, Biltjes I, Leyman P, Colpaert C, Thienpont L, Haute JVD, Gillardin JP, Tjalma W, Buytaert P, Schepper AD (2004) Preoperative breast MRI in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14:1209–1216 Schelfourt K, Goethem MV, Kersschot E, Verslegers I, Biltjes I, Leyman P, Colpaert C, Thienpont L, Haute JVD, Gillardin JP, Tjalma W, Buytaert P, Schepper AD (2004) Preoperative breast MRI in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14:1209–1216
23.
go back to reference Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Heller R, Reynolds C, Czerniecki B, Solin LJ, Schnall M (2001) MR imaging of the breast in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 176:399–406 Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Heller R, Reynolds C, Czerniecki B, Solin LJ, Schnall M (2001) MR imaging of the breast in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 176:399–406
24.
go back to reference Rodenko GN, Harms SE, Pruneda JM, Farrell RS, Evans WP, Copit DS, Krakos PA, Flamig DP (1996) MR imaging in the management before surgery of lobular carcinoma of the breast: correlation with pathology. Am J Roentgenol 167:1415–1419 Rodenko GN, Harms SE, Pruneda JM, Farrell RS, Evans WP, Copit DS, Krakos PA, Flamig DP (1996) MR imaging in the management before surgery of lobular carcinoma of the breast: correlation with pathology. Am J Roentgenol 167:1415–1419
25.
go back to reference Kawashima M, Tamaki Y, Nonaka T, Higuchi K, Kimura M, Koida T, Yanagita Y, Sugihara S (2002) MR imaging of mucinous carcinoma of the breast. Am J Roentgenol 179:179–183 Kawashima M, Tamaki Y, Nonaka T, Higuchi K, Kimura M, Koida T, Yanagita Y, Sugihara S (2002) MR imaging of mucinous carcinoma of the breast. Am J Roentgenol 179:179–183
26.
go back to reference Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Makino H, Shiina M, Kobayashi S, Shimizu K (2001) Staging of palpable T1–2 invasive breast cancer with helical CT. Breast Cancer 8:125–130PubMedCrossRef Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K, Makino H, Shiina M, Kobayashi S, Shimizu K (2001) Staging of palpable T1–2 invasive breast cancer with helical CT. Breast Cancer 8:125–130PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Saranelli F, Giuseppetti GM, Panizza P, Bazzocchi M, Fausto A, Simonetti G, Lattanzio V, Maschio AD (2004) Sensitivity of MRI versus mammography for detecting foci of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer in fatty and dense breasts using the whole-breast pathologic examination as a gold standard. Am J Roentgenol 183:1149–1157 Saranelli F, Giuseppetti GM, Panizza P, Bazzocchi M, Fausto A, Simonetti G, Lattanzio V, Maschio AD (2004) Sensitivity of MRI versus mammography for detecting foci of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer in fatty and dense breasts using the whole-breast pathologic examination as a gold standard. Am J Roentgenol 183:1149–1157
28.
go back to reference Holland R, Hendriks JHCL (1994) Microcalcifications associated with ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic-pathologic correlation. Semin Diagn Surg Pathol 11:181–192 Holland R, Hendriks JHCL (1994) Microcalcifications associated with ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic-pathologic correlation. Semin Diagn Surg Pathol 11:181–192
Metadata
Title
Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging, multidetector row computed tomography, ultrasonography, and mammography for tumor extension of breast cancer
Authors
Takayoshi Uematsu
Sachiko Yuen
Masako Kasami
Yoshihiro Uchida
Publication date
01-12-2008
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-008-9890-y

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 3/2008 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

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