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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 8/2011

01-08-2011 | Breast

Sonoelastographic lesion stiffness: preoperative predictor of the presence of an invasive focus in nonpalpable DCIS diagnosed at US-guided needle biopsy

Authors: Nariya Cho, Woo Kyung Moon, Jung Min Chang, Ann Yi, Hye Ryoung Koo, Jeong-Seon Park, In Ae Park

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 8/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To retrospectively evaluate whether sonoelastographic evaluation could help predict the presence of an invasive focus in nonpalpable DCIS diagnosed at US-guided needle biopsy.

Methods

One hundred and three consecutive nonpalpable DCIS lesions diagnosed at US-guided needle biopsy were analyzed. To identify the preoperative factors associated with upgrade to invasive cancers on surgical histology, lesion size, B-mode US findings, elasticity score, biopsy variables, and histological variables were analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Interobserver agreement for the elasticity score was evaluated using the multi-rater κ statistics.

Results

The overall upgrade rate was 23% (24 of 103). Elasticity score was found to be the only independent predictor of invasion. The upgrade rates according to the median elasticity score was 6.7% (1 of 15) for a score of 1, 20.6% (13 of 63) for a score of 2, and 40.0% (10 of 25) for a score of 3 (Odds ratio [OR] = 1; OR = 4.19, P = 0.207; OR = 12.32, P = 0.039, respectively). No association was found between other factors and the upgrade rate. The overall interobserver agreement for the elasticity score was moderate (κ = 0.587; P < .001).

Conclusions

Sonoelastographic lesion stiffness is an independent preoperative predictor of invasion in some patients with nonpalpable DCIS at US-guided needle biopsy.
Literature
1.
2.
Morrow M, Venta L, Stinson T, Bennett C (2001) Prospective comparison of stereotactic core biopsy and surgical excision as diagnostic procedures for breast cancer patients. Ann Surg 233:537–541PubMedCrossRef
3.
Lee CH, Carter D, Philpotts LE et al (2000) Ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed with stereotactic core needle biopsy: can invasion be predicted? Radiology 217:466–470PubMed
4.
Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH et al (2001) Stereotactic breast biopsy of nonpalpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates. Radiology 218:497–502PubMed
5.
King TA, Farr GH Jr, Cederbom GJ et al (2001) A mass on breast imaging predicts coexisting invasive carcinoma in patients with a core biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Am Surg 67:907–912PubMed
6.
Hoorntje LE, Schipper ME, Peeters PH et al (2003) The finding of invasive cancer after a preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma-in-situ: causes of ductal carcinoma-in-situ underestimates with stereotactic 14-gauge needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 10:748–753PubMedCrossRef
7.
Yen TW, Hunt KK, Ross MI et al (2005) Predictors of invasive breast cancer in patients with an initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: a guide to selective use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in management of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Am Coll Surg 200:516–526PubMedCrossRef
8.
Goyal A, Douglas-Jones A, Monypenny I et al (2006) Is there a role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ? Analysis of 587 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 98:311–314PubMedCrossRef
9.
Dillon MF, McDermott EW, Quinn CM et al (2006) Predictors of invasive disease in breast cancer when core biopsy demonstrates DCIS only. J Surg Oncol 93:559–563PubMedCrossRef
10.
Lee JW, Han W, Ko E et al (2008) Sonographic lesion size of ductal carcinoma in situ as a preoperative predictor for the presence of an invasive focus. J Surg Oncol 98:15–20PubMedCrossRef
11.
Rutstein LA, Johnson RR, Poller WR et al (2007) Predictors of residual invasive disease after core needle biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast J 13:251–257PubMedCrossRef
12.
Moran CJ, Kell MR, Flanagan FL, Kennedy M, Gorey TF, Kerin MJ (2007) Role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in high-risk ductal carcinoma in situ patients. Am J Surg 194:172–175PubMedCrossRef
13.
Hung WK, Ying M, Chan M, Mak KL, Chan LK (2010) The impact of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with a core biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer 17:276–280PubMedCrossRef
14.
Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR et al (2005) American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:7703–7720PubMedCrossRef
15.
Ophir J, Cespedes I, Ponnekanti H, Yazdi Y, Li X (1991) Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues. Ultrason Imaging 13:111–134PubMedCrossRef
16.
Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E et al (2006) Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology 239:341–350PubMedCrossRef
17.
Cho N, Moon WK, Park JS, Cha JH, Jang M, Seong MH (2008) Nonpalpable breast masses: evaluation by US elastography. Korean J Radiol 9:111–118PubMedCrossRef
18.
Scaperrotta G, Ferranti C, Costa C et al (2008) Role of sonoelastography in non-palpable breast lesions. Eur Radiol 18:2381–2389PubMedCrossRef
19.
Tan SM, Teh HS, Mancer JF, Poh WT (2008) Improving B mode ultrasound evaluation of breast lesions with real-time ultrasound elastography—a clinical approach. Breast 17:252–257PubMedCrossRef
20.
Sohn YM, Kim MJ, Kim EK, Kwak JY, Moon HJ, Kim SJ (2009) Sonographic elastography combined with conventional sonography: how much is it helpful for diagnostic performance? J Ultrasound Med 28:413–420PubMed
21.
Raza S, Odulate A, Ong EM, Chikarmane S, Harston CW (2010) Using real-time tissue elastography for breast lesion evaluation: our initial experience. J Ultrasound Med 29:551–563PubMed
22.
Krouskop TA, Wheeler TM, Kallel F, Garra BS, Hall T (1998) Elastic moduli of breast and prostate tissues under compression. Ultrason Imaging 20:260–274PubMed
23.
American College of Radiology (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system-Ultrasound (BI-RADS™). American College of Radiology, Reston
24.
Cho N, Moon WK, Park JS (2009) Real-time US elastography in the differentiation of suspicious microcalcifications on mammography. Eur Radiol 19:1621–1628PubMedCrossRef
25.
Fleiss JL (1971) Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 76:378–382CrossRef
26.
Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB (2006) Operator dependence of physician-performed whole-breast US: lesion detection and characterization. Radiology 241:355–365PubMedCrossRef
27.
Warren RM, Pointon L, Thompson D et al (2005) Reading protocol for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast: sensitivity and specificity analysis. Radiology 236:779–788PubMedCrossRef
28.
Regner DM, Hesley GK, Hangiandreou NJ et al (2006) Breast lesions: evaluation with US strain imaging–clinical experience of multiple observers. Radiology 238:425–437PubMedCrossRef
29.
Moon WK, Myung JS, Lee YJ, Park IA, Noh DY, Im JG (2002) US of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics 22:269–280PubMed
30.
Londero V, Zuiani C, Furlan A, Nori J, Bazzocchi M (2007) Role of ultrasound and sonographically guided core biopsy in the diagnostic evaluation of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast. Radiol Med 112:863–876PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Sonoelastographic lesion stiffness: preoperative predictor of the presence of an invasive focus in nonpalpable DCIS diagnosed at US-guided needle biopsy
Authors
Nariya Cho
Woo Kyung Moon
Jung Min Chang
Ann Yi
Hye Ryoung Koo
Jeong-Seon Park
In Ae Park
Publication date
01-08-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 8/2011
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2103-9

Other articles of this Issue 8/2011

European Radiology 8/2011 Go to the issue

Breast

Probability of malignancy for lesions detected on breast MRI: a predictive model incorporating BI-RADS imaging features and patient characteristics

Head and Neck

Prediction and monitoring of the response to chemoradiotherapy in oral squamous cell carcinomas using a pharmacokinetic analysis based on the dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging findings

Chest

Prevalence of enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes in heavy smokers—a comparative study

Neuro

Magnetic resonance 4D flow characteristics of cerebrospinal fluid at the craniocervical junction and the cervical spinal canal

Magnetic Resonance

Diagnostic value of 3D contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in Takayasu’s arteritis—a comparative study with digital subtraction angiography

Interventional

Feasibility of computed tomography based thermometry during interstitial laser heating in bovine liver