Imaging features of automated breast volume scanner: Correlation with molecular subtypes of breast cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 86 ◽  
pp. 267-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng-Yang Zheng ◽  
Qing Lu ◽  
Bei-Jian Huang ◽  
Han-Sheng Xia ◽  
Li-Xia Yan ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 58 (5) ◽  
pp. 515-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roxanna Hellgren ◽  
Paul Dickman ◽  
Karin Leifland ◽  
Ariel Saracco ◽  
Per Hall ◽  
...  

Background Automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) is an ultrasound (US) device with a wide scanner that sweeps over a large area of the breast and the acquired transverse images are sent to a workstation for reconstruction and review. Whether ABVS is as reliable as handheld US is, however, still not established. Purpose To compare the sensitivity and specificity of ABVS to handheld breast US for detection of breast cancer, in the situation of recall after mammography screening. Material and Methods A total of 113 women, five with bilateral suspicious findings, undergoing handheld breast US due to a suspicious mammographic finding in screening, underwent additional ABVS. The methods were assessed for each breast and each detected lesion separately and classified into two categories: breasts with mammographic suspicion of malignancy and breasts with a negative mammogram. Results Twenty-six cancers were found in 25 women. In the category of breasts with a suspicious mammographic finding (n = 118), the sensitivity of both handheld US and ABVS was 88% (22/25). The specificity of handheld US was 93.5% (87/93) and ABVS was 89.2% (83/93). In the category of breasts with a negative mammography (n = 103), the sensitivity of handheld US and ABVS was 100% (1/1). The specificity of handheld US was 100% (102/102) and ABVS was 94.1% (96/102). Conclusion ABVS can potentially replace handheld US in the investigation of women recalled from mammography screening due to a suspicious finding. Due to the small size of our study population, further investigation with larger study populations is necessary before the implementation of such practice.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (11) ◽  
pp. 1062-1074
Author(s):  
Junlin Huang ◽  
Qing Lin ◽  
Chunxiao Cui ◽  
Jie Fei ◽  
Xiaohui Su ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Karen S Johnson ◽  
Emily F Conant ◽  
Mary Scott Soo

Abstract Gene expression profiling has reshaped our understanding of breast cancer by identifying four molecular subtypes: (1) luminal A, (2) luminal B, (3) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-enriched, and (4) basal-like, which have critical differences in incidence, response to treatment, disease progression, survival, and imaging features. Luminal tumors are most common (60%–70%), characterized by estrogen receptor (ER) expression. Luminal A tumors have the best prognosis of all subtypes, whereas patients with luminal B tumors have significantly shorter overall and disease-free survival. Distinguishing between these tumors is important because luminal B tumors require more aggressive treatment. Both commonly present as irregular masses without associated calcifications at mammography; however, luminal B tumors more commonly demonstrate axillary involvement at diagnosis. HER2-enriched tumors are characterized by overexpression of the HER2 oncogene and low-to-absent ER expression. HER2+ disease carries a poor prognosis, but the development of anti-HER2 therapies has greatly improved outcomes for women with HER2+ breast cancer. HER2+ tumors most commonly present as spiculated masses with pleomorphic calcifications or as calcifications alone. Basal-like cancers (15% of all invasive breast cancers) predominate among “triple negative” cancers, which lack ER, progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 expression. Basal-like cancers are frequently high-grade, large at diagnosis, with high rates of recurrence. Although imaging commonly reveals irregular masses with ill-defined or spiculated margins, some circumscribed basal-like tumors can be mistaken for benign lesions. Incorporating biomarker data (histologic grade, ER/PR/HER2 status, and multigene assays) into classic anatomic TNM staging can better inform clinical management of this heterogeneous disease.


2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (12) ◽  
pp. 3089-3099
Author(s):  
Alberto Casagrande ◽  
Francesco Fabris ◽  
Rossano Girometti

AbstractAgreement measures are useful tools to both compare different evaluations of the same diagnostic outcomes and validate new rating systems or devices. Cohen’s kappa (κ) certainly is the most popular agreement method between two raters, and proved its effectiveness in the last sixty years. In spite of that, this method suffers from some alleged issues, which have been highlighted since the 1970s; moreover, its value is strongly dependent on the prevalence of the disease in the considered sample. This work introduces a new agreement index, the informational agreement (IA), which seems to avoid some of Cohen’s kappa’s flaws, and separates the contribution of the prevalence from the nucleus of agreement. These goals are achieved by modelling the agreement—in both dichotomous and multivalue ordered-categorical cases—as the information shared between two raters through the virtual diagnostic channel connecting them: the more information exchanged between the raters, the higher their agreement. In order to test its fair behaviour and the effectiveness of the method, IA has been tested on some cases known to be problematic for κ, in the machine learning context and in a clinical scenario to compare ultrasound (US) and automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) in the setting of breast cancer imaging.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 1000-1008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rossano Girometti ◽  
Martina Zanotel ◽  
Viviana Londero ◽  
Anna Linda ◽  
Michele Lorenzon ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
pp. S25
Author(s):  
Min Seo Bang ◽  
Ji Eun Choi ◽  
Min Ji Jang ◽  
Yeon Jung Jang

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document