Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2014

01-01-2014 | Epidemiology

Impact of full-field digital mammography on pre-operative diagnosis and surgical treatment of mammographic microcalcification

Authors: S. M. Bundred, J. Zhou, S. Whiteside, J. Morris, M. Wilson, E. Hurley, N. Bundred

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 2/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Accurate pre-operative diagnosis of impalpable breast lesions correlates closely with the number of surgical procedures required for treatment. Correct diagnosis of mammographic microcalcification (MM) as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer is important because lesions upgraded to malignant diagnosis at surgery require repeat surgical procedures in 44 % of cases. Despite correct pre-operative diagnosis of MM, 26 % require second therapeutic operations to achieve surgical clearance. Theoretically, improved conspicuity of malignant MM using digital mammography could improve diagnostic work-up and improve surgical outcomes for MM. To determine the impact of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) on the diagnostic accuracy and positive predictive value (PPV) of biopsy of MM and surgical management of MM, screening and symptomatic cases with MM (n = 1,479) were reviewed for women imaged between August 2007 and March 2010 using screen-film mammography (SFM) (n = 711), and using FFDM, imaged between April 2010 to March 2012 (n = 768). Demographic information including pre and postoperative diagnosis, and number and types of surgical procedures were recorded. Overall, 302 (128 invasive) and 251 (110 invasive) malignant lesions were diagnosed using SFM and FFDM, respectively. Reduction in PPV of biopsy was observed (SFM 42.5 %; FFDM 32.7 %, p < 0.001). Correct pre-operative diagnosis was achieved at first attempt more often with FFDM (SFM 80.6 %; FFDM 89.5 %, p < 0.001). For lesions with pre-operative diagnosis, B5 more cases achieved surgical clearance with a single therapeutic operation with FFDM (SFM 66.3 %; FFDM 76.7 %, p = 0.017), and more lesions over 2 cm underwent mastectomy as the initial surgical procedure (SFM 47.0 %; FFDM 62.9 %, p = 0.005). Correct pre-operative diagnosis of MM using digital mammography reduced second therapeutic operations but increased mastectomy rate in larger cancers over two centimetres. This will increase concerns about treatment of lesions detected in the screening programme with widespread use of digital mammography.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Wallis MG, Cheung S, Kearins O, Lawrence GM (2009) Non-operative diagnosis-effect on repeat—operation rates in the UK breast screening programme. Eur Radiol 19:318–323PubMedCrossRef Wallis MG, Cheung S, Kearins O, Lawrence GM (2009) Non-operative diagnosis-effect on repeat—operation rates in the UK breast screening programme. Eur Radiol 19:318–323PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Sigal-Zafrani B, Muller K, El Khoury C, Varoutas PC, Buron C, Vincent-Salomon A, Alran S, Livartowski A, Neuenschwander S, Salmon RJ (2008) Vacuum-assisted large–core needle biopsy (VLNB) improves the management of patients with breast microcalcifications-analysis of 1,009 cases. Eur J Surg Oncol 34:377–381. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2007.05.006 PubMedCrossRef Sigal-Zafrani B, Muller K, El Khoury C, Varoutas PC, Buron C, Vincent-Salomon A, Alran S, Livartowski A, Neuenschwander S, Salmon RJ (2008) Vacuum-assisted large–core needle biopsy (VLNB) improves the management of patients with breast microcalcifications-analysis of 1,009 cases. Eur J Surg Oncol 34:377–381. doi:10.​1016/​j.​ejso.​2007.​05.​006 PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (2001) In: Wilson R, Asbury D,Cooke, J, Michell, M, Patnick J (eds) Clinical guidelines for breast cancer screening assessment, NHSBSP Publication No. 49 April. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Sheffield, p 25–28 National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (2001) In: Wilson R, Asbury D,Cooke, J, Michell, M, Patnick J (eds) Clinical guidelines for breast cancer screening assessment, NHSBSP Publication No. 49 April. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Sheffield, p 25–28
4.
go back to reference NHS Cancer Screening Programme and Association of breast surgery at BASO (2012) An audit of screen detected breast cancers for the year of screening April 2010 to March 2011. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit NHS Cancer Screening Programme and Association of breast surgery at BASO (2012) An audit of screen detected breast cancers for the year of screening April 2010 to March 2011. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit
6.
go back to reference Dillon MF, McDermott EW, Quinn CM, O’Doherty A, O’Higgins N, Hill A (2006) Predictors of invasive disease in breast cancer when core biopsy demonstrates DCIS only. J Surg Oncol 93:559–563PubMedCrossRef Dillon MF, McDermott EW, Quinn CM, O’Doherty A, O’Higgins N, Hill A (2006) Predictors of invasive disease in breast cancer when core biopsy demonstrates DCIS only. J Surg Oncol 93:559–563PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference O’Flynn EAM, Morel JC, Gonzalez J, Dutt N, Evans D, Wasan R, Michell MJ (2009) Prediction of the presence of invasive disease from the measurement of extent of malignant microcalcification on mammography and ductal carcinoma in situ grade at core biopsy. Clin Radiol 64:178–183PubMedCrossRef O’Flynn EAM, Morel JC, Gonzalez J, Dutt N, Evans D, Wasan R, Michell MJ (2009) Prediction of the presence of invasive disease from the measurement of extent of malignant microcalcification on mammography and ductal carcinoma in situ grade at core biopsy. Clin Radiol 64:178–183PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Houssami N, Ciatto S, Ellis I, Ambrogetti D (2006) Underestimation of malignancy of breast core-needle biopsy concepts and precise overall category-specific estimates. Cancer 109:487–495CrossRef Houssami N, Ciatto S, Ellis I, Ambrogetti D (2006) Underestimation of malignancy of breast core-needle biopsy concepts and precise overall category-specific estimates. Cancer 109:487–495CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Houssami N, Ambrogetti D, Marinovich L, Bianchi S, Macaskill P, Vezzosi V, Mamounas EP, Ciatto S (2011) Accuracy of a preoperative model for predicting invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma-in situ on vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 18:1364–1371PubMedCrossRef Houssami N, Ambrogetti D, Marinovich L, Bianchi S, Macaskill P, Vezzosi V, Mamounas EP, Ciatto S (2011) Accuracy of a preoperative model for predicting invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma-in situ on vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 18:1364–1371PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Thomas J, Evans A, Macartney J, Pinder SE, Hanby A, Ellis I, Kearins O, Roberts T, Clements K, Lawrence G, Bishop H (2010) Radiological and pathological size estimations of pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, specimen handling and the influence on the success of breast conservation surgery: a review of 2,564 cases from the Sloane Project. Br J Cancer 102:285–293PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Thomas J, Evans A, Macartney J, Pinder SE, Hanby A, Ellis I, Kearins O, Roberts T, Clements K, Lawrence G, Bishop H (2010) Radiological and pathological size estimations of pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, specimen handling and the influence on the success of breast conservation surgery: a review of 2,564 cases from the Sloane Project. Br J Cancer 102:285–293PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Lagios MD, Westdahl PR, Margolin FR, Roses MR (1982) Duct carcinoma in situ relationship of extent of noninvasive disease to the frequency of occult invasion, multicentricity, lymph node metastases, and short-term treatment failures. Cancer 50:1309–1314PubMedCrossRef Lagios MD, Westdahl PR, Margolin FR, Roses MR (1982) Duct carcinoma in situ relationship of extent of noninvasive disease to the frequency of occult invasion, multicentricity, lymph node metastases, and short-term treatment failures. Cancer 50:1309–1314PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Evans A, Clements K, Maxwell A, Dobson H, Wallis M, Lawrence G, Bishop H (2007) Mammographic bi-dimensional product: a powerful predictor of successful excision of ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Radiol 62(8):787–791PubMedCrossRef Evans A, Clements K, Maxwell A, Dobson H, Wallis M, Lawrence G, Bishop H (2007) Mammographic bi-dimensional product: a powerful predictor of successful excision of ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Radiol 62(8):787–791PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Fischmann A, Siegmann KC, Wersebe A, Claussen CD, Muller-Schimpfle M (2005) Comparison of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography: image quality and lesion detection. Br J Radiol 78:312–315PubMedCrossRef Fischmann A, Siegmann KC, Wersebe A, Claussen CD, Muller-Schimpfle M (2005) Comparison of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography: image quality and lesion detection. Br J Radiol 78:312–315PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, van Engen R, Bartels-Kortland A (2009) Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program. Radiology 253(2):353–358PubMedCrossRef Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, van Engen R, Bartels-Kortland A (2009) Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program. Radiology 253(2):353–358PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Vinnicombe S, Pinto Pereira AM, McCormack VA, Shiel S, Perry N, dos Santos Silva IM (2009) Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparison within the UK Breast Screening Program and Systematic Review of Published Data. Radiology. doi:10.1148/radiol.2512081235 [Online]PubMed Vinnicombe S, Pinto Pereira AM, McCormack VA, Shiel S, Perry N, dos Santos Silva IM (2009) Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparison within the UK Breast Screening Program and Systematic Review of Published Data. Radiology. doi:10.​1148/​radiol.​2512081235 [Online]PubMed
16.
go back to reference Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T, Flanagan F, Hargaden G, Kell M, Stokes M, Kennedy M (2011) Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study. J Clin Pathol 64:215–219. doi:10.1136/jcp.2010.085860 PubMedCrossRef Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T, Flanagan F, Hargaden G, Kell M, Stokes M, Kennedy M (2011) Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study. J Clin Pathol 64:215–219. doi:10.​1136/​jcp.​2010.​085860 PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Bianchi, S. et al on behalf of VANCB Study Group (2011) Positive predictive value for malignancy on surgical excision of breast lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3) diagnosed by stereotactic vacuum-assisted needle core biopsy (VANCB): a large multi-institutional study in Italy. Breast, [Online]. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2010.12.003 Bianchi, S. et al on behalf of VANCB Study Group (2011) Positive predictive value for malignancy on surgical excision of breast lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3) diagnosed by stereotactic vacuum-assisted needle core biopsy (VANCB): a large multi-institutional study in Italy. Breast, [Online]. doi:10.​1016/​j.​breast.​2010.​12.​003
19.
go back to reference Bluekens AMJ, Holland R, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJM, den Heeten GJ (2012) Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicentre study. Radiology. doi:10.1148/radiol.12111461 [On-line]PubMed Bluekens AMJ, Holland R, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJM, den Heeten GJ (2012) Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicentre study. Radiology. doi:10.​1148/​radiol.​12111461 [On-line]PubMed
20.
go back to reference Bluekens AMJ, Karssemeijer N, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJM, van Engen RE, Broeders MJM, den Heeten GJ (2010) Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates. Eur Radiol 20:2067–2073. doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1786-7 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Bluekens AMJ, Karssemeijer N, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJM, van Engen RE, Broeders MJM, den Heeten GJ (2010) Consequences of digital mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: initial changes and long-term impact on referral rates. Eur Radiol 20:2067–2073. doi:10.​1007/​s00330-010-1786-7 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Margenthaler JA, Duke D, Monsees BS, Barton PT, Clark C, Dietz JR (2006) Correlation between core-biopsy and excisional biopsy in breast high-risk lesions. Am J Surg 192:537–543CrossRef Margenthaler JA, Duke D, Monsees BS, Barton PT, Clark C, Dietz JR (2006) Correlation between core-biopsy and excisional biopsy in breast high-risk lesions. Am J Surg 192:537–543CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, Evans WP, Lechner MC, Richardson TR, Tocino I, Wray AB (1997) Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 204:485–488PubMed Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, Evans WP, Lechner MC, Richardson TR, Tocino I, Wray AB (1997) Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 204:485–488PubMed
23.
go back to reference Sohn V, Arthurs Z, Herbert G, Keylock J, Perry J, Eckbert M, Fellabaum D, Smith D, Brown T (2007) Atypical ductal hyperplasia: improved accuarcy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted versus the 14-gauage core biopsy needle. Ann Surg Oncol 14(9):2497–2501PubMedCrossRef Sohn V, Arthurs Z, Herbert G, Keylock J, Perry J, Eckbert M, Fellabaum D, Smith D, Brown T (2007) Atypical ductal hyperplasia: improved accuarcy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted versus the 14-gauage core biopsy needle. Ann Surg Oncol 14(9):2497–2501PubMedCrossRef
24.
25.
go back to reference Jones TW, Bansal G, Farmer H, Orr B, Russell H, Hobson L, Goggen D, Lyburn I (2011) Comparison of analogue and digital mammographic appearances of screen-detected invasive breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res 13(S1):4CrossRef Jones TW, Bansal G, Farmer H, Orr B, Russell H, Hobson L, Goggen D, Lyburn I (2011) Comparison of analogue and digital mammographic appearances of screen-detected invasive breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res 13(S1):4CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Maxwell AJ, Hanson IM, Sutton CJ, Fitzgerald J, Pearson JM (2001) A study of breast cancers detected in the incident round of the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme: the importance of early detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ. The Breast 10:392–398PubMedCrossRef Maxwell AJ, Hanson IM, Sutton CJ, Fitzgerald J, Pearson JM (2001) A study of breast cancers detected in the incident round of the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme: the importance of early detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ. The Breast 10:392–398PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Willett AM, Michell MJ, Lee MJR (eds) (2010) Best practice diagnostic guidelines for patients presenting with breast symptoms. DOH, London Willett AM, Michell MJ, Lee MJR (eds) (2010) Best practice diagnostic guidelines for patients presenting with breast symptoms. DOH, London
28.
go back to reference Association of Breast Surgery at BASO (2009) Surgical guidelines for the management of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol Guidelines, pp S1–S22 Association of Breast Surgery at BASO (2009) Surgical guidelines for the management of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol Guidelines, pp S1–S22
29.
go back to reference NHS Cancer Screening Programme and Association of breast surgery at BASO (2003) An audit of screen detected breast cancers for the year of screening April 2001 to March 2002, NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit NHS Cancer Screening Programme and Association of breast surgery at BASO (2003) An audit of screen detected breast cancers for the year of screening April 2001 to March 2002, NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit
30.
go back to reference Non-operative Diagnosis Subgroup of the National Coordinating Group for Breast Screening Pathology (2001) Guidelines for Non-Operative Diagnostic Procedures and Reporting in Breast Cancer Screening, NHSBSP Publication No 50. National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, Sheffield Non-operative Diagnosis Subgroup of the National Coordinating Group for Breast Screening Pathology (2001) Guidelines for Non-Operative Diagnostic Procedures and Reporting in Breast Cancer Screening, NHSBSP Publication No 50. National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, Sheffield
31.
go back to reference Weigel S, Decker T, Korsching E, Hungermann D, Böcker W, Heindel W (2010) Calcifications in digital mammographic screening: improvement of early detection of invasive breast cancers? Radiology 255:738–745. doi:10.1148/radiol.10091173 PubMedCrossRef Weigel S, Decker T, Korsching E, Hungermann D, Böcker W, Heindel W (2010) Calcifications in digital mammographic screening: improvement of early detection of invasive breast cancers? Radiology 255:738–745. doi:10.​1148/​radiol.​10091173 PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Nederend J, Duijm LEM, Louwman MWJ, Groenewoud JH, Donkers-van Rossum AB, Voogd AC (2012) Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study. Ann Oncol 23(12):3098–3103PubMedCrossRef Nederend J, Duijm LEM, Louwman MWJ, Groenewoud JH, Donkers-van Rossum AB, Voogd AC (2012) Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study. Ann Oncol 23(12):3098–3103PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference TG Fyall, TG, Boggis CRM, Astley SM, Sergeant JC, Morris J, Whiteside S, Wilson M (2012) Changes in recall rate, biopsy rate and cancer detection since the introduction of digital mammography. Poster session presented at British Society of Breast Radiology Annual Scientific Meeting, Leeds, 11–13 Nov 2012 TG Fyall, TG, Boggis CRM, Astley SM, Sergeant JC, Morris J, Whiteside S, Wilson M (2012) Changes in recall rate, biopsy rate and cancer detection since the introduction of digital mammography. Poster session presented at British Society of Breast Radiology Annual Scientific Meeting, Leeds, 11–13 Nov 2012
34.
go back to reference Turnbull AE, Puri S, Bagnall M, York J, Farmer S, Horsley N (2012) Comparison of recall, biopsy, and cancer detection rates in the Southern Derbyshire screening programme between 2006 and 2009 using hard-copy mammography and in 2009 to 2012 following the full introduction of soft-copy reporting, Poster session presented at British Society of Breast Radiology Annual Scientific Meeting, Leeds, 11–13 Nov 2012 Turnbull AE, Puri S, Bagnall M, York J, Farmer S, Horsley N (2012) Comparison of recall, biopsy, and cancer detection rates in the Southern Derbyshire screening programme between 2006 and 2009 using hard-copy mammography and in 2009 to 2012 following the full introduction of soft-copy reporting, Poster session presented at British Society of Breast Radiology Annual Scientific Meeting, Leeds, 11–13 Nov 2012
35.
go back to reference Barr N, Boggis C, Barr N, Wilson M, Morris J, Berks M, Astley S (2010) Comparison of microcalcification detection rates and recall rates in digital and analogue mammography. Lect Notes Comput Sci 6136(2010):513–517CrossRef Barr N, Boggis C, Barr N, Wilson M, Morris J, Berks M, Astley S (2010) Comparison of microcalcification detection rates and recall rates in digital and analogue mammography. Lect Notes Comput Sci 6136(2010):513–517CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Impact of full-field digital mammography on pre-operative diagnosis and surgical treatment of mammographic microcalcification
Authors
S. M. Bundred
J. Zhou
S. Whiteside
J. Morris
M. Wilson
E. Hurley
N. Bundred
Publication date
01-01-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2803-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2014 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