Nonpalpable Breast Cancer: Mammographic Appearance as Predictor of Histologic Type

Thurfjell, Mercidyl Gelig; Lindgren, Anders; Thurfjell, Erik

doi:10.1148/radiol.2221001471

Cited by 27 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies revealed that mass, accounting for the majority of mammographic images, was more powerful predictor in women in the USA and Europe (Pisano et al, 1998;Thurfjell et al, 2002). Our results revealed that the ratio of the cases detected as a mass in young groups was lower than that of older groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 37%

Differences Between Breast Cancer Patients Younger and Older than 40 Years: Mammographic Findings

Wang

Liu

et al. 2014

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the mammogarphic appearance between breast cancer patients aged <40 and ≥40 years. Methods: Needle localization and biopsy of suspicious mammographic lesions identified 1,959 breast carcinomas in a single institution from Jun 2012 to Apr 2013. According to the age, we divided patients into two groups: <40 and ≥40 years old, and analyzed mammographic appearance separately. Results: Young patients had 44.2% foci with calcification, but old patients only had 39.4% (P<0.001). In younger group, the ratios of cases according to mass density were 41.8% or higher, 58.2% equivalent and lower. In older group, the ratios were 55.5 % and 44.5%, respectively. There were statistical differences between high density and others (P<0.05). The ratios of cases according to mass margin were 13.9% circumscribed and microlobulated, 86.1% indistinct and spiculated in the younger group, as compared to 6.5% and 93.5%, respectively, in the older group (P<0.05). Conclusions: Mammographic findings differ between young and old patients with breast cancer, for example regarding mass density, mass margin and microcalcification ratios.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 37%

Differences Between Breast Cancer Patients Younger and Older than 40 Years: Mammographic Findings

Wang

Liu

et al. 2014

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have looked at the correlation between imaging findings and prognostic factors [18,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. To our knowledge, however, no report has correlated imaging findings in node-negative invasive breast cancers that were analysed according to the Breast Imaging Report and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon with prognostic factors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation between mammographic and sonographic findings and prognostic factors in patients with node-negative invasive breast cancer

Shin

Kim²,

Huh³

et al. 2011

BJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to correlate sonographic and mammographic findings with prognostic factors in patients with node-negative invasive breast cancer. Methods: Sonographic and mammographic findings in 710 consecutive patients (age range 21-81 years; mean age 49 years) with 715 node-negative invasive breast cancers were retrospectively evaluated. Pathology reports relating to tumour size, histological grade, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), extensive intraductal component (EIC), oestrogen receptor (ER) status and HER-2/neu status were reviewed and correlated with the imaging findings. Statistical analysis was performed using logistic regression analysis and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: On mammography, non-spiculated masses with calcifications were associated with all poor prognostic factors: high histological grade, positive LVI, EIC, HER-2/neu status and negative ER. Other lesions were associated with none of these poor prognostic factors. Hyperdense masses on mammography, the presence of mixed echogenicity, posterior enhancement, calcifications in-or-out of masses and diffusely increased vascularity on sonography were associated with high histological grade and negative ER. Associated calcifications on both mammograms and sonograms were correlated with EIC and HER-2/neu overexpression. The ICC value for the disease extent was 0.60 on mammography and 0.70 on sonography. Conclusion: Several sonographic and mammographic features can have a prognostic value in the subsequent treatment of patients with node-negative invasive breast cancer. Radiologists should pay more attention to masses that are associated with calcifications because on both mammography and sonography associated calcifications were predictors of positive EIC and HER-2/neu overexpression.

show abstract

“…This is consistent with results of other published series. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Additional 16/102 (16%) of small breast cancers have mammographic appearance of a round/oval mass without calcifications. Calcifications with/without mass were present in 24/102 (24%) of small breast cancers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is in agreement with results of Tjurfjell. 13 Samardar 15 defined that palpable mass associated with a focal area of breast asymmetry or architectural distortion is very often malignant. We found in our series only 20 palpable small breast cancers and they all appeared mammographically as a mass with/without calcifications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the most common mammographic appearance of T1a and T1b invasive breast cancer?

Podkrajšek¹,

Žgajnar²,

Hočevar³

2008

Radiology and Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nonpalpable Breast Cancer: Mammographic Appearance as Predictor of Histologic Type

Abstract: Mammographic appearance can be a predictor of histologic diagnosis in three of four nonpalpable breast cancers.

Cited by 27 publications

References 19 publications

Differences Between Breast Cancer Patients Younger and Older than 40 Years: Mammographic Findings

Differences Between Breast Cancer Patients Younger and Older than 40 Years: Mammographic Findings

Correlation between mammographic and sonographic findings and prognostic factors in patients with node-negative invasive breast cancer

What is the most common mammographic appearance of T1a and T1b invasive breast cancer?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About