Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2017

01-11-2017 | Breast Oncology

Adjunctive Breast-Specific Gamma Imaging for Detecting Cancer in Women with Calcifications at Mammography

Authors: Hyun Woo Chung, MD, PhD, Young So, MD, PhD, Jung-Hyun Yang, MD, PhD, Kyoung Sik Park, MD, PhD, Young Bum Yoo, MD, PhD, Nami Choi, MD, PhD, Mi Young Kim, MD, Jayoun Kim, PhD, Eun Jeong Lee, MD, PhD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 12/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Mammography detects calcium deposits sensitively, but the specificity for differentiating malignancy from benign calcifications is low. Thus, we investigated whether adjunctive breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) has incremental value for detecting cancer in women with suspicious calcifications detected by mammography, and compared BSGI with adjunctive ultrasonography (US).

Methods

The medical records of women without a personal history of breast cancer who underwent mammography for breast evaluation from 2009 to 2014 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients who had calcifications detected by mammography, with a result of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories 3–5, underwent adjunctive US and BSGI and were included in this study. A total of 302 breast lesions in 266 women (mean age ± standard deviation 49 ± 9 years) were selected for this study.

Results

For detecting breast cancer using mammography plus BSGI, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating curve with 95% confidence intervals were 94% (91–96), 90% (86–93), 91% (87–94), 94% (90–96), and 0.92 (0.89–0.95), respectively. For mammography plus US, the respective values were 97% (94–98), 51% (46–57), 68% (63–73), 94% (90–96), and 0.74 (0.70–0.78).

Conclusions

Adjunctive BSGI had higher specificity than adjunctive US without loss of sensitivity. This finding suggests that adjunctive BSGI may be a useful complementary initial imaging method to improve the detection of breast cancer in women who have calcifications with suspicious morphology at mammography.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Cox RF, Morgan MP. Microcalcifications in breast cancer: Lessons from physiological mineralization. Bone. 2013;53:437–50.CrossRefPubMed Cox RF, Morgan MP. Microcalcifications in breast cancer: Lessons from physiological mineralization. Bone. 2013;53:437–50.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Gajdos C, Tartter PI, Bleiweiss IJ, Hermann G, de Csepel J, Estabrook A, et al. Mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer reflects pathologic characteristics. Ann Surg. 2002;235:246–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Gajdos C, Tartter PI, Bleiweiss IJ, Hermann G, de Csepel J, Estabrook A, et al. Mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer reflects pathologic characteristics. Ann Surg. 2002;235:246–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference de Roos MA, van der Vegt B, de Vries J, Wesseling J, de Bock GH. Pathological and biological differences between screen-detected and interval ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2097–104.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral de Roos MA, van der Vegt B, de Vries J, Wesseling J, de Bock GH. Pathological and biological differences between screen-detected and interval ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2097–104.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Farshid G, Sullivan T, Downey P, Gill PG, Pieterse S. Independent predictors of breast malignancy in screen-detected microcalcifications: biopsy results in 2545 cases. Br J Cancer. 2011;105:1669–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Farshid G, Sullivan T, Downey P, Gill PG, Pieterse S. Independent predictors of breast malignancy in screen-detected microcalcifications: biopsy results in 2545 cases. Br J Cancer. 2011;105:1669–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Rao AA, Feneis J, Lalonde C, Ojeda-Fournier H. A pictorial review of changes in the BI-RADS fifth edition. Radiographics. 2016;36:623–39.CrossRefPubMed Rao AA, Feneis J, Lalonde C, Ojeda-Fournier H. A pictorial review of changes in the BI-RADS fifth edition. Radiographics. 2016;36:623–39.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002;225:165–75.CrossRefPubMed Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002;225:165–75.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Yu PC, Lee YW, Chou FF, et al. Clustered microcalcifications of intermediate concern detected on digital mammography: ultrasound assessment. Breast. 2011;20:495–500.CrossRefPubMed Yu PC, Lee YW, Chou FF, et al. Clustered microcalcifications of intermediate concern detected on digital mammography: ultrasound assessment. Breast. 2011;20:495–500.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Jones EA, Phan TD, Blanchard DA, Miley A. Breast-specific gamma-imaging: molecular imaging of the breast using 99mTc-sestamibi and a small-field-of-view gamma-camera. J Nucl Med Technol. 2009;37:201–5.CrossRefPubMed Jones EA, Phan TD, Blanchard DA, Miley A. Breast-specific gamma-imaging: molecular imaging of the breast using 99mTc-sestamibi and a small-field-of-view gamma-camera. J Nucl Med Technol. 2009;37:201–5.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Scopinaro F, Pani R, De Vincentis G, Soluri A, Pellegrini R, Porfiri LM. High-resolution scintimammography improves the accuracy of technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile scintimammography: use of a new dedicated gamma camera. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:1279–88.CrossRefPubMed Scopinaro F, Pani R, De Vincentis G, Soluri A, Pellegrini R, Porfiri LM. High-resolution scintimammography improves the accuracy of technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile scintimammography: use of a new dedicated gamma camera. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:1279–88.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Brem RF, Floerke AC, Rapelyea JA, Teal C, Kelly T, Mathur V. Breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct imaging modality for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology. 2008;247:651–7.CrossRefPubMed Brem RF, Floerke AC, Rapelyea JA, Teal C, Kelly T, Mathur V. Breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct imaging modality for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology. 2008;247:651–7.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Wahner-Roedler DL, Boughey JC, Hruska CB, et al. The use of molecular breast imaging to assess response in women undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: a pilot study. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:344–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wahner-Roedler DL, Boughey JC, Hruska CB, et al. The use of molecular breast imaging to assess response in women undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer: a pilot study. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:344–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Rechtman LR, Lenihan MJ, Lieberman JH, Teal CB, Torrente J, Rapelyea JA, et al. Breast-specific gamma imaging for the detection of breast cancer in dense versus nondense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014:202;293–8.CrossRefPubMed Rechtman LR, Lenihan MJ, Lieberman JH, Teal CB, Torrente J, Rapelyea JA, et al. Breast-specific gamma imaging for the detection of breast cancer in dense versus nondense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014:202;293–8.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:35–40.CrossRefPubMed Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:35–40.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Bent CK, Bassett LW, D’Orsi CJ, Sayre JW. The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:1378–83.CrossRefPubMed Bent CK, Bassett LW, D’Orsi CJ, Sayre JW. The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:1378–83.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Bond M, Pavey T, Welch K, Cooper C, Garside R, Dean S, et al. Systematic review of the psychological consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. Health Technol Assess. 2013;17:1–170, v–vi. Bond M, Pavey T, Welch K, Cooper C, Garside R, Dean S, et al. Systematic review of the psychological consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. Health Technol Assess. 2013;17:1–170, v–vi.
16.
go back to reference Kim SA, Chang JM, Cho N, Yi A, Moon WK. Characterization of breast lesions: comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasonography. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16:229–38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kim SA, Chang JM, Cho N, Yi A, Moon WK. Characterization of breast lesions: comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasonography. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16:229–38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Weigert JM, Bertrand ML, Lanzkowsky L, Stern LH, Kieper DA. Results of a multicenter patient registry to determine the clinical impact of breast-specific gamma imaging, a molecular breast imaging technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:W69–75.CrossRefPubMed Weigert JM, Bertrand ML, Lanzkowsky L, Stern LH, Kieper DA. Results of a multicenter patient registry to determine the clinical impact of breast-specific gamma imaging, a molecular breast imaging technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:W69–75.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Ohuchi N, Suzuki A, Sobue T, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anti-cancer Randomized Trial (J-START): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:341–8.CrossRefPubMed Ohuchi N, Suzuki A, Sobue T, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anti-cancer Randomized Trial (J-START): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387:341–8.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Hruska CB, Rhodes DJ, Conners AL, Jones KN, Carter RE, Lingineni RK, et al. Background parenchymal uptake during molecular breast imaging and associated clinical factors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:W363–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hruska CB, Rhodes DJ, Conners AL, Jones KN, Carter RE, Lingineni RK, et al. Background parenchymal uptake during molecular breast imaging and associated clinical factors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:W363–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004;233:830–49.CrossRefPubMed Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004;233:830–49.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Yu X, Hu G, Zhang Z, et al. Retrospective and comparative analysis of (99m)Tc-Sestamibi breast specific gamma imaging versus mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of breast cancer in Chinese women. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:450. doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2537-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yu X, Hu G, Zhang Z, et al. Retrospective and comparative analysis of (99m)Tc-Sestamibi breast specific gamma imaging versus mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of breast cancer in Chinese women. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:450. doi:10.​1186/​s12885-016-2537-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Holbrook A, Newel MS. Alternative screening for women with dense breasts: breast-specific gamma imaging (molecular breast imaging). AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:252–6.CrossRefPubMed Holbrook A, Newel MS. Alternative screening for women with dense breasts: breast-specific gamma imaging (molecular breast imaging). AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:252–6.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Park KS, Chung HW, Yoo YB, Yang JH, Choi N, So Y. Complementary role of semiquantitative analysis of breast-specific gamma imaging in the diagnosis of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:690–5.CrossRefPubMed Park KS, Chung HW, Yoo YB, Yang JH, Choi N, So Y. Complementary role of semiquantitative analysis of breast-specific gamma imaging in the diagnosis of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:690–5.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Bitencourt AG, Graziano L, Osorio CA, Guatelli CS, Souza JA, Mendonca MH, et al. MRI Features of mucinous cancer of the breast: correlation with pathologic findings and other imaging methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:238-46.CrossRefPubMed Bitencourt AG, Graziano L, Osorio CA, Guatelli CS, Souza JA, Mendonca MH, et al. MRI Features of mucinous cancer of the breast: correlation with pathologic findings and other imaging methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206:238-46.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Moon H, Noh WC, Kim HA, et al. The relationship between estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression of breast cancer and the retention index in dual phase (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;50:246–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Moon H, Noh WC, Kim HA, et al. The relationship between estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression of breast cancer and the retention index in dual phase (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;50:246–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Kim SJ, Kim SJ, Kim IJ, Pak K, Kim BS, Shin S. Factors associated with (18)F-Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in T1 and T2 invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;50:240–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kim SJ, Kim SJ, Kim IJ, Pak K, Kim BS, Shin S. Factors associated with (18)F-Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in T1 and T2 invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;50:240–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Badan GM, Piato S, Roveda DJ, de Faria Castro Fleury E. Predictive values of BI-RADS® magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:1701–7.CrossRefPubMed Badan GM, Piato S, Roveda DJ, de Faria Castro Fleury E. Predictive values of BI-RADS® magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the detection of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:1701–7.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM, et al. Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology. 2010;254:79–87.CrossRefPubMed Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM, et al. Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology. 2010;254:79–87.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Kuhn KJ, Rapelyea JA, Torrente J, Teal CB, Brem RF. Comparative diagnostic utility of low-dose breast-specific gamma imaging to current clinical standard. Breast J. 2016;22:180–8.CrossRefPubMed Kuhn KJ, Rapelyea JA, Torrente J, Teal CB, Brem RF. Comparative diagnostic utility of low-dose breast-specific gamma imaging to current clinical standard. Breast J. 2016;22:180–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Adjunctive Breast-Specific Gamma Imaging for Detecting Cancer in Women with Calcifications at Mammography
Authors
Hyun Woo Chung, MD, PhD
Young So, MD, PhD
Jung-Hyun Yang, MD, PhD
Kyoung Sik Park, MD, PhD
Young Bum Yoo, MD, PhD
Nami Choi, MD, PhD
Mi Young Kim, MD
Jayoun Kim, PhD
Eun Jeong Lee, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-11-2017
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 12/2017
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6058-1

Other articles of this Issue 12/2017

Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2017 Go to the issue