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
Breast Cancer Research
Published in: Breast Cancer Research 5/2006

Open Access 01-10-2006 | Research article

Magnetic resonance mammography in the evaluation of recurrence at the prior lumpectomy site after conservative surgery and radiotherapy

Authors: Lorenzo Preda, Gaetano Villa, Stefania Rizzo, Luca Bazzi, Daniela Origgi, Enrico Cassano, Massimo Bellomi

Published in: Breast Cancer Research | Issue 5/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

The aim was to assess the value of magnetic resonance mammography (MRM) in the detection of recurrent breast cancer on the prior lumpectomy site in patients with previous conservative surgery and radiotherapy.

Methods

Between April 1999 and July 2003, 93 consecutive patients with breast cancer treated with conservative surgery and radiotherapy underwent MRM, when a malignant lesion on the site of lumpectomy was suspected by ultrasound and/or mammography. MRM scans were evaluated by morphological and dynamic characteristics. MRM diagnosis was compared with histology or with a 36-month imaging follow-up. Enhancing areas independent of the prior lumpectomy site, incidentally detected during the MRM, were also evaluated.

Results

MRM findings were compared with histology in 29 patients and with a 36-month follow-up in 64 patients. MRM showed 90% sensitivity, 91.6% specificity, 56.3% positive predictive value and 98.7% negative predictive value for detection of recurrence on the surgical scar. MRM detected 13 lesions remote from the scar. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of MRM for detection of breast malignancy were 93.8%, 90%, 62.5% and 98.8%, respectively.

Conclusion

MRM is a sensitive method to differentiate recurrence from post-treatment changes at the prior lumpectomy site after conservative surgery and radiation therapy. The high negative predictive value of this technique can avoid unnecessary biopsies or surgical treatments.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Fisher B, Redmond C, Poisson R, Margolese R, Wolmark N, Wickerham L, Fisher E, Deutsch M, Caplan R, Pilch Y, et al: Eight-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1989, 320: 822-828.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Morakkabati N, Leutner CC, Schmiedel A, Schild HH, Kuhl CK: Breast MR imaging during or soon after radiation therapy. Radiology. 2003, 229: 893-901.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Kramer S, Schulz-Wendtland R, Hagedorn K, Bautz W, Lang N: Magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of local recurrences in breast cancer. Anticancer Res. 1998, 18: 2159-2161.PubMed
4.
Kaiser WA, Zeitler E: MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology. 1989, 170: 681-686.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Heywang SH, Wolf A, Pruss E, Hilbertz T, Eiermann W, Permanetter W: MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology. 1989, 171: 95-103.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Murray AD, Redpath TW, Needham G, Gilbert FJ, Brookes JA, Eremin O: Dynamic magnetic resonance mammography of both breasts following local excision and radiotherapy for breast carcinoma. Br J Radiol. 1996, 69: 594-600.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Schlegel A, Beck R, Wendt T, Kellner W, Lommatzsch B, Untch M, Nathrath WB: Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast after limited surgery and radiation therapy. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993, 17: 891-900.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Mumtaz H, Davidson T, Hall-Craggs MA, Payley M, Walmsley K, Cowley G, Taylor I: Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and conventional triple assessment in locally recurrent breast cancer. Br J Surg. 1997, 84: 1147-1151. 10.1002/bjs.1800840831.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Belli P, Costantini M, Romani M, Marano P, Pastore G: Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer recurrence. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2002, 73: 223-235. 10.1023/A:1015868406986.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Davis PL, McCarty KS: Sensitivity of enhanced MRI for the detection of breast cancer: new, multicentric, residual, and recurrent. Eur Radiol. 1997, 7(Suppl 5): 289-298. 10.1007/PL00006910.CrossRef
11.
American College of Radiology: llustrated Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). 1998, Reston, VA: American College of Radiology
12.
Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, Aguilar M, Marubini E: Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002, 347: 1227-1232. 10.1056/NEJMoa020989.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Soderstrom CE, Harms SE, Farrell RS, Pruneda JM, Flamig DP: Detection with MR imaging of residual tumor in the breast soon after surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997, 168: 485-488.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Rieber A, Merkle E, Zeitler H, Gorich J, Kreienberg R, Brambs HJ, Tomczak R: Value of MR mammography in the detection and exclusion of recurrent breast carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1997, 21: 780-784. 10.1097/00004728-199709000-00024.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Muuller RD, Barkhausen J, Sauerwein W, Langer R: Assessment of local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy with MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998, 22: 408-412. 10.1097/00004728-199805000-00011.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Dershaw DD: Mammography in patients with breast cancer treated by breast conservation (lumpectomy with or without radiation). AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995, 164: 309-316.CrossRefPubMed
17.
De Vita VT, Hellman S, Rosemberg SA: Cancer. Principle and Practice of Oncology. 2005, Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1467-1469. 7
18.
Orel SG, Fowble BL, Solin LJ, Schultz DJ, Conant EF, Troupin RH: Breast cancer recurrence after lumpectomy and radiation therapy for early-stage disease: prognostic significance of detection method. Radiology. 1993, 188: 189-194.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG, Hochman MG, Langlotz CP, Reynolds CA, Torosian MH: Breast MR imaging: interpretation model. Radiology. 1997, 202: 833-841.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, Leutner C, Wardelmann E, Gieseke J, Schild HH: Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions?. Radiology. 1999, 211: 101-110.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Liberman L, Menell JH: Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Radiol Clin North Am. 2002, 40: 409-430. 10.1016/S0033-8389(01)00017-3.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ, Barclay J, Schwerin EH, Sickles EA, Hylton NM: Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000, 175: 35-43.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Matsushima S, Fukuda K: High-spatial-resolution MR imaging of focal breast masses: interpretation model based on kinetic and morphological parameters. Radiat Med. 2005, 23: 43-50.PubMed
24.
Kerslake RW, Fox JN, Carleton PJ, Imrie MJ, Cook AM, Bowsley SJ, Horsman A: Dynamic contrast-enhanced and fat suppressed magnetic resonance imaging in suspected recurrent carcinoma of the breast: preliminary experience. Br J Radiol. 1994, 67: 1158-1168.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Shapeero LG, Lesnik A, Contesso G, Sarrazin D, Masselot J, Vanel D: Assessment of breast cancer recurrence with contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging: preliminary results in 26 patients. Radiology. 1993, 188: 473-478.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Dao TH, Rahmouni A, Campana F, Laurent M, Asselain B, Fourquet A: Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the irradiated breast: differentiation with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 1993, 187: 751-755.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E: Invasive mucinous carcinoma of the breast missed by contrast-enhancing MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol. 1996, 6: 929-931. 10.1007/BF00240709.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Schorn C, Fischer U, Luftner-Nagel S, Westerhof JP, Grabbe E: MRI of the breast in patients with metastatic disease of unknown primary. Eur Radiol. 1999, 9: 470-473. 10.1007/s003300050694.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Kawashima M, Tamaki Y, Nonaka T, Higuchi K, Kimura M, Koida T, Yanagita Y, Sugihara S: MR imaging of mucinous carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002, 179: 179-183.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Stack JP, Redmond OM, Codd MB, Dervan PA, Ennis JT: Breast disease: tissue characterization with Gd-DTPA enhancement profiles. Radiology. 1990, 174: 491-494.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Isomoto I, Koshiishi T, Okimoto T, Okada H, Uetani M, Hayashi K: Gradually enhancing breast cancer on dynamic MRI. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi. 2000, 60: 514-519.PubMed
32.
Heywang SH, Hilbertz T, Beck R, Bauer WM, Eiermann W, Permanetter W: Gd-DTPA enhanced MR imaging of the breast in patients with postoperative scarring and silicon implants. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1990, 14: 348-356.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Viehweg P, Heinig A, Lampe D, Buchmann J, Heywang-Kobrunner SH: Retrospective analysis for evaluation of the value of contrast-enhanced MRI in patients treated with breast conservative therapy. MAGMA. 1998, 7: 141-152.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Boetes C, Strijk SP, Holland R, Barentsz JO, Van Der Sluis RF, Ruijs JH: False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors. Eur Radiol. 1997, 7: 1231-1234. 10.1007/s003300050281.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Magnetic resonance mammography in the evaluation of recurrence at the prior lumpectomy site after conservative surgery and radiotherapy
Authors
Lorenzo Preda
Gaetano Villa
Stefania Rizzo
Luca Bazzi
Daniela Origgi
Enrico Cassano
Massimo Bellomi
Publication date
01-10-2006
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Breast Cancer Research / Issue 5/2006
Electronic ISSN: 1465-542X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr1600

Other articles of this Issue 5/2006

Breast Cancer Research 5/2006 Go to the issue

Commentary

Recent translational research: circulating tumor cells in breast cancer patients

Research article

Classification of ductal carcinoma in situ by gene expression profiling

Commentary

Identification of murine mammary stem cells: implications for studies of mammary development and carcinogenesis

Research article

Expression of tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases (TIMP)-3 protein in invasive breast carcinoma: Relation to tumor phenotype and clinical outcome

Research article

Presence of apoptotic and nonapoptotic disseminated tumor cells reflects the response to neoadjuvant systemic therapy in breast cancer

Commentary

Prevention of breast cancer using selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs)
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