Clinical, mammographic, and sonographic determination of preoperative breast cancer size

Abstract

Clinical, mammographic, and sonographic preoperative size measurements were correlated with the values obtained at pathologic examination in a series of 31 patients with pathologically T1 (n = 23) and T2 (n = 8) breast carcinomas. Sonographic measurements demonstrated the highest correlation coefficient (r = 0.84), with the lowest residual standard deviation calculated in relation to the regression line. As a result, real-time sonography yielded the most accurate determination of breast cancer size in this series. Sonographic tumor size determination has proved valuable when mammography failed to delineate the tumor, particularly in patients with dense breasts. It may also be recommended in the evaluation of tumor response to nonsurgical conservative treatment.

Dietary supplementation with L-arginine in patients with breast cancer (> 4 cm) receiving multimodality treatment: report of a feasibility study

“…Previous studies comparing clinical, mammographic or ultrasound assessment with maximal histological diameter of the tumour have demonstrated no difference between the modalities (Pain et al, 1992), although others have shown ultrasound to be better (Fornage et al, 1987;Forouhi et al, 1992). In our study, ultrasound and mammography gave substantially lower response rates than did clinical examination.…”

Evaluation of ER, PgR, HER-2 and Ki-67 as predictors of response to neoadjuvant anthracycline chemotherapy for operable breast cancer

“…Previous studies have focused on the ability to predict clinical tumour shrinkage, despite the fact that local response is a crude measure dependent on several variables including primary tumour size, oedema, necrosis and subjective variation in tumour measurements. Clinical assessment frequently overestimates tumour size (Fornage et al, 1987;Pain et al, 1992;Forouhi et al, 1994;Meden et al, 1995;Allen et al, 2001). Radiological assessment of maximum tumour dimensions by ultrasound or mammography is often performed to assess response and correlates better with histological tumour size than clinical measurements (Allen et al, 2001;Fiorentino et al, 2001).…”

Influence of breast cancer histology on the relationship between ultrasound and pathology tumor size measurements

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] These studies indicate that although magnetic resonance imaging is accurate at predicting pathologic tumor size, ultrasonography is more widely available, relatively faster and less expensive. For these reasons, ultrasound appears to be the most useful imaging modality for preoperative tumor assessment.…”