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
La radiologia medica
Published in: La radiologia medica 12/2019

01-12-2019 | Mammography | BREAST RADIOLOGY

Preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM)

Authors: Francesco Amato, Giulia Bicchierai, Donatello Cirone, Catherine Depretto, Federica Di Naro, Ermanno Vanzi, Gianfranco Scaperrotta, Tommaso Vincenzo Bartolotta, Vittorio Miele, Jacopo Nori

Published in: La radiologia medica | Issue 12/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of our study was to assess the performance of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) in the preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) patients, about the valuation of the extension of disease and in measurement of lesions. Then, we selected retrospectively, among the 1500 patients underwent to CEDM at the Breast Diagnostics Department of the Careggi University Hospital of Florence and the National Cancer Institute of Milan from September 2016 to November 2018, 31 women (mean age 57.1 aa; range 41–78 aa) with a definitive histological diagnosis of ILC. CEDM has proved to be a promising imaging technique, being characterized by a sensitivity of 100% in the detection of the index lesion, and of 84.2% in identifying any adjunctive lesions: It was the presence of a non-mass enhancement (NME) to lower the sensitivity of the technique (25% vs. 100% for mass-like enhancements or a mass closely associated with a NME). Specificity in the characterization of additional lesions was 66.7%, and the diagnosis of the extension of disease was correct in 77.4% of cases: NME also led to a decrease in diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of disease extension up to 40% versus 85% for masses and 80% for masses associated with NME (M/NME). Moreover, in 12/31 (38.7%), CEDM allowed to correctly identify lesions not shown by mammography + ultrasonography + tomosynthesis: In the half of these (6/12), there was a multicentricity, thus allowing an adequate surgical planning change. CEDM was also very accurate in analyzing the maximum diameter of the masses, while it was much less reliable in the case of the M/NME and pure NME. In conclusion, CEDM is a new promising imaging technique in the loco-regional preoperative staging and in the evaluation of disease extension for ILC, especially in case of mass enhancement lesions.
Literature
1.
Li CI, Anderson BO, Daling JR, Moe RE (2003) Trends in incidence rates of invasive lobular and ductal breast carcinoma. JAMA 289:1421–1424PubMed
2.
Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, Elledge RM (2004) Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res 6:R149–R156PubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Macchini M, Ponziani M, Iamurri AP et al (2018) Role of DCE-MR in predicting breast cancer subtypes. Radiol Med 123(10):753–764PubMed
4.
Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849PubMed
5.
Brem RF, Ioffe M, Rapelyea JA et al (2009) Invasive lobular carcinoma: detection with mammography, sonography, MRI, and breast- specific gamma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192:379–383PubMed
6.
Butler RS, Venta LA, Wiley EL, Ellis RL, Dempsey PJ, Rubin E (1999) Sonographic evaluation of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:325–330PubMed
7.
Montemezzi S, Cavedon C, Camera L et al (2017) 1H-MR spectroscopy of suspicious breast mass lesions at 3T: a clinical experience. Radiol Med 122(3):161–170PubMed
8.
Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Heller R et al (2001) MR Imaging of the breast in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:399–406PubMed
9.
Zanotel M, Bednarova I, Londero V et al (2018) Automated breast ultrasound: basic principles and emerging clinical applications. Radiol Med 123(1):1–12PubMed
10.
Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C (2008) MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 107:1–14PubMed
11.
Selvi V, Nori J, Meattini I, Francolini G, Morelli N, De Benedetto D, Bicchierai G, Di Naro F, Gill MK, Orzalesi L, Sanchez L, Susini T, Bianchi S, Livi L, Miele V (2018) Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative staging and work-up of patients affected by invasive lobular carcinoma or invasive ductolobular carcinoma. Biomed Res Int. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1155/​2018/​1569060 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
ACR Guidelines and Standards Committee (2008) ACR practice guideline for the performance of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast
13.
Kalovidouri A, Firmenich N, Delattre BMA et al (2017) Fat suppression techniques for breast MRI: Dixon versus spectral fat saturation for 3D T1-weighted at 3 T. Radiol Med 122(10):731–742PubMed
14.
Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C (2008) Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol 18:1307–1318PubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Lee-Felker Stephanie A et al (2017) Newly diagnosed breast cancer: comparison of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and breast mr imaging in the evaluation of extent of disease. Radiology 285(2):389–400PubMed
16.
Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS et al (2013) Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast carcinoma. Radiology 266:743–751PubMed
17.
Hobbs MM, Taylor DB, Buzynski S, Peake RE (2015) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and contrast enhanced MRI (CEMRI): patient preferences and tolerance. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 59:300–305PubMed
18.
Bernardi D, Belli P, Benelli E et al (2017) Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): recommendations from the Italian College of BreastRadiologists (ICBR) by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) and the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa). Radiol Med 122(10):723–730PubMedPubMedCentral
19.
20.
Luczynska E, Heinze-Paluchowska S, Hendrick E et al (2015) Comparison between breast MRI and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography. Med Sci Monit 21:1358–1367PubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Francescone MA, Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS, Hughes MC, Zheng J, Moskowitz C, Morris EA (2014) Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM). Eur J Radiol 83(8):1350–1355PubMed
22.
Bicchierai G, Nori J, De Benedetto D, Boeri C, Vanzi E, Bianchi S, Kaur Gill M, Cirone D, Miele V (2018) Role of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the post biopsy management of B3 lesions: preliminary results. Tumori J 17:300891618816212
23.
Trimboli RM, Codari M, Khouri Chalouhi K et al (2018) Correlation between voxel-wise enhancement parameters on DCE-MRI and pathologicalprognostic factors in invasive breast cancers. Radiol Med 123(2):91–97PubMed
24.
Bicchierai G, Di Naro F, Amato F (2018) CEDM lexicon and imaging interpretation tips. In: Nori J, Kaur M (eds) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM), chapter. 9; pp 93–118. Springer, Berlin. ISBN 978-3-319- 94552-1. eBook ISBN 978-3-319-94553-8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-319-94553-8_​9
25.
D’Orsi CJACR (2013) BI-RADS atlas: breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, Reston
26.
Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS® magnetic resonance imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, Reston
27.
Bartolotta TV, Orlando A, Cantisani V et al (2018) Focal breast lesion characterization according to the BI-RADS US lexicon: role of a computer-aided decision-making support. Radiol Med 123(7):498–506PubMed
28.
Hilleren DJ, Andersson IT, Lindholm K, Linnell FS (1991) Invasive lobular carcinoma: mammographic findings in a 10-year experience. Radiology 178:149–154PubMed
29.
Krecke KN, Gisvold JJ (1993) Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic findings and extent of disease at diagnosis in 184 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 161:957–960PubMed
30.
Le Gal M, Ollivier L, Asselain B, Meunier M, Laurent M, Vielh P (1992) Mammographic features of 455 invasive lobular carcinomas. Radiology 185:705–708PubMed
31.
Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310PubMed
32.
33.
Lee-Felker SA et al (2017) Newly diagnosed breast cancer: comparison of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and breast MR imaging in the evaluation of extent of disease. Radiology 285(1):389–400PubMed
34.
Boetes C et al (1995) Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent. Radiology 197(3):743–747PubMed
35.
Schelfout K et al (2004) Preoperative breast MRI in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14(7):1209–1216PubMed
36.
37.
Marino MA, Pennisi O, Donia A et al (2017) Organizational and welfare mode of breast centers network: a survey of Sicilian radiologists. Radiol Med 122(9):639–650PubMed
38.
Gruber IV et al (2013) Measurement of tumour size with mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance imaging as compared to histological tumour size in primary breast cancer. BMC Cancer 13(1):328PubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Smith A, Drew PJ (2003) Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging aids the surgical management of invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 29(1):32–37PubMed
40.
Rodenko GN, Harms SE, Pruneda JM, Farrell RS Jr, 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. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167(6):1415–1419PubMed
41.
42.
Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B, Senn H-J (2013) Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 24(9):2206–2223PubMedPubMedCentral
43.
44.
Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F et al (2014) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size. Eur Radiol 24:256–264PubMed
45.
Zheng Y, Zhong M, Ni C et al (2017) Radiotherapy and nipple-areolar complex necrosis after nipple-sparing mastectomy: asystematic review and meta-analysis. Radiol Med 122(3):171–178PubMed
46.
Kanyilmaz G, Aktan M, Koc M et al (2017) Unplanned irradiation of internal mammary lymph nodes in breast cancer. Radiol Med 122(6):405–411PubMed
47.
Thomas M, Kelly ED, Abraham J et al (2019) Invasive lobular breast cancer: a review of pathogenesis, diagnosis, management, and future directions of early stage disease. Semin Oncol 46(2):121–132PubMed
48.
Fiorentino A, Mazzola R, Naccarato S et al (2017) Synchronous bilateral breast cancer irradiation: clinical and dosimetrical issues using volumetricmodulated arc therapy and simultaneous integrated boost. Radiol Med 122(6):464–471PubMed
49.
Iorfida Monica, Maiorano Eugenio, Orvieto Enrico, Maisonneuve Patrick, Bottiglieri Luca, Rotmensz Nicole, Montagna Emilia, Dellapasqua Silvia, Veronesi Paolo, Galimberti Viviana, Luini Alberto, Goldhirsch Aaron, Colleoni Marco, Viale Giuseppe (2012) Invasive lobular breast cancer: subtypes and outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat 133:713–723. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10549-012-2002-z CrossRefPubMed
50.
Fallahpour S, Navaneelan T, De P, Borgo A (2017) Breast cancer survival by molecular subtype: a population-based analysis of cancer registry data. CMAJ Open 5:E734–E739PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM)
Authors
Francesco Amato
Giulia Bicchierai
Donatello Cirone
Catherine Depretto
Federica Di Naro
Ermanno Vanzi
Gianfranco Scaperrotta
Tommaso Vincenzo Bartolotta
Vittorio Miele
Jacopo Nori
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
Springer Milan
Published in
La radiologia medica / Issue 12/2019
Print ISSN: 0033-8362
Electronic ISSN: 1826-6983
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-019-01116-7

Other articles of this Issue 12/2019

La radiologia medica 12/2019 Go to the issue

BREAST RADIOLOGY

Usefulness of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging with a dedicated axillary sequence for the detection of axillary lymph node metastasis in patients with early ductal breast cancer

CHEST RADIOLOGY

Interventional radiology protocol for treatment of esophagogastric anastomotic leakage

COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY

Acute penile trauma: imaging features in the emergency setting

COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY

Dual-energy CT: theoretical principles and clinical applications

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Response to “Is there a role for hydrogel spacer in post-prostatectomy radiotherapy setting?”

ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY

Clostridium difficile colitis: CT findings and differential diagnosis