scholarly journals BREAST TUMOR

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (10) ◽  
pp. 1510-1517
Author(s):  
Rakhshanda Jabbar ◽  
Bushra Riaz ◽  
Fatima Imran
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Breast Tumor ◽  
Preoperative Assessment ◽  
Breast Ultrasound ◽  
Radiology Department ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Appropriate Treatment

Accurate preoperative assessment of tumor size in breast cancer is important forchoosing appropriate treatment. Mammography & sonography both have been used to predicttumor size but there have been conflicting reports about their accuracy. Some studies havementioned ultrasound to be more accurate than mammography in the preoperative assessmentof breast tumor size. Objectives: The objective of the study was to determine the correlation ofmammography and ultrasound in the preoperative assessment of breast tumor size in patientswith breast cancer taking pathological tumor size as gold standard. Study Design: It was across-sectional survey. Setting: Radiology department SKMCH & RC Lahore. Period: Studywas completed over a period of 6 months from Nov 09, 2008 to May 08, 2009. Subjects andMethods: Eighty cases fulfilling the inclusion criteria were selected. After informed consent,bilateral mammography and breast ultrasound were done in all the patients. Pathologicalmeasurements were done after surgery in the longest diameter of the specimen. Mammographicand ultrasonographic measurements were correlated with pathological measurementsusing Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Results: Ultrasonographic measurements correlatedmore accurately with the pathological measurements as compared to mammographicmeasurements. Correlation coefficient “r” was 0.944 for ultrasound measurements versus 0.898for mammographic measurements. Correlation was higher for lesions of 20 mm or less in therelargest diameter than for larger tumors. Conclusion: Ultasonography is a more accurate toolfor preoperative assessment of breast tumor size especially for small sized tumors of less than20 mm.

ROLE OF SONOMAMMOGRAPHY IN MONITORING THE RESPONSE OF NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY IN MALIGNANT BREAST MASSES

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sherine George Moftah ◽  
Essam Mohamed Hafez ◽  
Walid Dahy Zidan
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Residual Tumor ◽  
High Accuracy ◽  
Breast Ultrasound ◽  
Radiology Department ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms ◽  
Progressive Course

Abstract Background Breast cancer is a leading cause of death and disability between women, particularly young women, in low- and average -income countries (Porter, 2018). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is increasingly used in management patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) (Mougalian et al., 2015). Mammography and breast ultrasound are the most widest diagnostic techniques used to evaluate primary tumor size and character at the time of diagnosis and monitoring the response to NAC (Kald et al., 2015). Aim of the work The purpose of this study is to assess and evaluate the role and the accuracy of Mammography and breast ultrasound modalities in monitoring the response of the breast cancer to the neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients and methods Twenty three patients presenting with pathologically proven malignant mass and conducted for neoadjuvant chemotherapy with age above 40 years-old. They were referred to the radiology department (mammography unit, Ultrasound unit and MRI unit) at El Salam oncology center, during the period between December 2018 to June 2019. Once a patient satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria for this study, an elaborate history was taken from all the patients which was followed by a thorough clinical evaluation, in which duration of symptoms, affected side, affected breast and family history. Patients were subjected to evaluation before starting neoadjunant chemotherapy by mammography, ultrasound and MRI as well as after finishing the neoadjuvant cycles which usually was ranging 3-4 cycles. Results Total of 23 patients with breast cancer were enrolled in this study. The patients were in the age group of 41-70 years with mean age of 54 years. Majority of patients had infiltrative ductal carcinoma IDC (16 cases -69.56% and the rest of cases were infiltrative lobular carcinoma (9 cases -39.13 %). After monitoring the response of the cases to neoadjuvant chemotherapy the results showed significant regressive course to the majority of cases ( 17 cases ) (73.91%) with the rest non respondent cases divided to cases with stationary ( 3 cases ) (13.04% ) and cases with progressive course ( 3 cases ) (13.04% ). The comparison between the results of Sonomammographic assessment of the breast lesions before and after the neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles and also to MRI show close results. There were 5 cases that showed non-respondent (including stationary course and progressive course) in both Sonomammography and MRI and only one case that was respondent according to Sonomammography and non-respondent according to MRI breast (false +e). On the other hand there were 16 cases that had showed respondent fashion in both Sonomammography and MRI. Also there was one case that had showed non-respondent course according to Sonomammography and was respondent according to MRI results (false –ve). Sonomammography sensitivity was 94.12 % and specificity was 83.33% compared to MRI results, with high accuracy value reaching to 91.30 %. Conclusion The ability of mammography and breast ultrasound to accurately measure residual tumor size following neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to Breast MRI measurement of the residual tumor demonstrated sensitivity of 94.12 % and specificity of 83.33% with high accuracy value reaching to 91.30 %. Even that the MRI is proved to be of high accuracy in detecting residual tumor, sonomammographic imaging isa cost-effective imaging modality than the MRI with sensitivity and specificity near to that of MRI.

scholarly journals Comparison of Ultrasound and Mammography With Pathologic Examination in Determining the Size of Malignant Breast Masses

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elham Shobeiri ◽  
Mohsen Fath Ordoubadi ◽  
Marzieh Jahanian ◽  
Nasrin Amiri
Keyword(s):  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Breast Ultrasound ◽  
Pathologic Examination ◽  
Breast Masses ◽  
Diagnostic Measures ◽  
Appropriate Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Malignant Breast ◽  
Actual Size

Estimation of breast tumor size is one of the most important diagnostic measures in determining the appropriate treatment. Mammography and ultrasound are the main methods for determining the size of breast tumors. The aim of this study was to compare the correlation between tumor size calculated by breast ultrasound and mammography with the results of pathologic measurements in malignant breast masses. Patients diagnosed with breast cancer by pathologic examination underwent mammography and ultrasound to determine the size of the tumor. The largest observed diameter in ultrasound and mammography was recorded as the tumor size. The mean (SD) tumor size measured by ultrasound (23.58±9.38 mm) was significantly less than the actual size based on histopathologic examination (28.87±11.17 mm) (P=0.008). However, there was no significant difference between the measurements performed between mammography (26.54±10.46 mm) and histopathology (P=0.18). The correlation coefficient between mammography and pathologic examination (r=0.61) was higher than the correlation coefficient between ultrasonography and pathology (r=0.5). Mammography, compared to breast ultrasound, had better accuracy in determining the size of malignant breast masses.

scholarly journals Factors that influence ultrasound evaluation of breast tumor size

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin Xu ◽  
Ge Ma ◽  
Mengdi Liang ◽  
Yue Wang ◽  
Hong Pan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Breast Tumor ◽  
Core Biopsy ◽  
Molecular Subtype ◽  
Histological Grade ◽  
Breast Ultrasound ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Her2 Breast Cancer ◽  
Ultrasound Evaluation

Aims: To determine the factors influencing ultrasound breast tumor size assessment accuracy.Material and methods: Five factors (tumor type, molecular subtype, histological size, histological grade, and breast density) were used to assess the measurement accuracy of breast ultrasound in tumor size. Size underestimation was defined as ultrasound index lesion diameter < histological size by at least 5 mm.Results: Breast ultrasound underestimated tumor size significantly, especially in cases with intraductal components (p=0.002). There was a tendency for higher size underestimation in breast cancer tumors with high–histological grade (p=0.03), human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-overexpressing breast cancer tumors (p=0.02) and hormone receptor (HR)−/HER2+ breast cancer tumors (p=0.008). Furthermore, core biopsy revealedhigher probability of size underestimation with intraductal components (p=0.002). Size underestimation was more frequent with larger histological size (p<0.001). Masses in non-dense breasts were significantly underestimated (p=0.036) compared to dense breasts.Conclusions: The size underestimation was influenced by pathological type, molecular subtype, and histological size. The pathological results of core biopsy were conducive for predicting tumor size pre-surgery in precise breast cancer diagnosis.

Comparison of Mammography and Ultrasonography for Tumor Size of DCIS of Breast Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-213
Author(s):  
Yu Wang ◽  
Jiantao Wang ◽  
Haiping Wang ◽  
Xinyu Yang ◽  
Liming Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Dense Breast ◽  
Pathological Examination ◽  
Negative Group ◽  
The Difference

Objective: Accurate assessment of breast tumor size preoperatively is important for the initial decision-making in surgical approach. Therefore, we aimed to compare efficacy of mammography and ultrasonography in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of breast cancer. Methods: Preoperative mammography and ultrasonography were performed on 104 women with DCIS of breast cancer. We compared the accuracy of each of the imaging modalities with pathological size by Pearson correlation. For each modality, it was considered concordant if the difference between imaging assessment and pathological measurement is less than 0.5cm. Results: At pathological examination tumor size ranged from 0.4cm to 7.2cm in largest diameter. For mammographically determined size versus pathological size, correlation coefficient of r was 0.786 and for ultrasonography it was 0.651. Grouped by breast composition, in almost entirely fatty and scattered areas of fibroglandular dense breast, correlation coefficient of r was 0.790 for mammography and 0.678 for ultrasonography; in heterogeneously dense and extremely dense breast, correlation coefficient of r was 0.770 for mammography and 0.548 for ultrasonography. In microcalcification positive group, coeffient of r was 0.772 for mammography and 0.570 for ultrasonography. In microcalcification negative group, coeffient of r was 0.806 for mammography and 0.783 for ultrasonography. Conclusion: Mammography was more accurate than ultrasonography in measuring the largest cancer diameter in DCIS of breast cancer. The correlation coefficient improved in the group of almost entirely fatty/ scattered areas of fibroglandular dense breast or in microcalcification negative group.

scholarly journals Predicting Neutropenia Risk in Breast Cancer Patients from Pre- Chemotherapy Characteristics

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-21
Author(s):  
Sodiq Lawal ◽  
Michael J. Korenberg ◽  
Natalia Pittman ◽  
Mihaela Mates
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Febrile Neutropenia ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Computing Device

A previous study (Pittman, Hopman, Mates) of breast cancer patients undergoing curative chemotherapy (CT) found that the third most common reason for emergency department (ER) visits and hospital admission (HA) was febrile neutropenia. Factors associated with ER visits and HA included (1) stage of the cancer, (2) size of tumor, (3) adjuvant versus neo-adjuvant CT (“adjuvance”), and (4) number of CT cycles. We hypothesized that a statistically-significant predictor of neutropenia could be built based on some of these factors, so that risk of neutropenia predicted for a patient feeling unwell during CT could be used in weighing need to visit the ER. The number of CT cycles was not used as a factor so that the predictor could calculate the neutropenia risk for a patient before the first CT cycle. Different models were built corresponding to different pre-chemotherapy factors or combinations of factors. The single factor yielding the best classification accuracy was tumor size (Mathews’ correlation coefficient φ = +0.18, Fisher’s exact two-tailed probability P < 0.0374). The odds ratio of developing febrile neutropenia for the predicted high-risk group compared to the predicted low-risk group was 5.1875. Combining tumor size with adjuvance yielded a slightly more accurate predictor (Mathews’ correlation coefficient φ = +0.19, Fisher’s exact two-tailed probability P < 0.0331, odds ratio = 5.5093). Based on the observed odds ratios, we conclude that a simple predictor of neutropenia may have value in deciding whether to recommend an ER visit. The predictor is sufficiently fast that it can run conveniently as an Applet on a mobile computing device.

Invasive ductal breast cancer, tumor size, and its correlation between physical examination, imaging techniques, and pathological anatomy.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e11035-e11035
Author(s):  
Ana Lopez-Gonzalez ◽  
Patricia Ibeas ◽  
Maria Soledad Carmona ◽  
Elisabeth Rivero ◽  
Roberto Lopez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Physical Examination ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Hypothesis Test ◽  
Imaging Techniques ◽  
Radiology Department ◽  
Pathological Anatomy ◽  
Oncological Treatment ◽  
Power Curves

e11035 Background: The most frequent indication of magnetic resonance in breast cancer is the evaluation of tumoral extension. Several studies suggest that mammography and ultrasound underestimate tumor size. We try to analize the correlation between the tumor size of invasive ductal carcinomas in physical examination, mammography, magnetic resonance and pathological anatomy. Methods: We review the 290 magnetic resonance made in our Radiology Department from 1st January 2009 to 1st September 2010. 56 of them were applied as complementary study before surgery of suspected lesions of breast cancer. We made an analysis of paired test, and then a hypothesis test for equal sample testing, supported by an analysis of power curves. The paired test analysed were physical examination (PE)- mammography - magnetic resonance (MR) - pathological anatomy (PA). Results: A 100% were women; average of age of 54.1 years old. A 42.8% were premenopausal. Averages of tumor size: 18.3mm in PE; 18.8mm in mammography; 25.3mm in MR and 24.8mm in PA. The correlation between the tumor size in PE and PA is not statistically significant (p=0.05, 95% CI 11.07; 1.93), and also between the mammography and the PA (p=0.05, 95% CI 10.69; 1.47). The correlation between tumor size in mammography and MR is statistically significant (p=0.05, 95% CI -9.83; -3.26), and also between MR and PA (p=0.05, 95% CI -3.31; 4.25). We analysed the relation between clinical tumor size by MR and PA size, and in a 25% of the cases, the clinical and the pathological stage were different. The pathological was more advance in a 57.1% of them. Conclusions: Mammography underestimate the tumor size, with no correlation with the pathological tumor size. However, there is a good correlation between the tumor size in MR and the pathological size. The MR is the most reliable imaging technique to optimize the surgical and oncological treatment in patients with breast cancer.

Diagnostic accuracy of B-scan in predicting retinoblastoma in children, taking Magnetic Resonance Imaging of orbits as gold standard

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Saba Murad ◽  
Ishtiaq Ahmed ◽  
Hania Ali ◽  
Maria Ghani ◽  
Sana Murad
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Radiology Department ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract The objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of B-scan in predicting retinoblastoma (Rb) taking Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) as a gold standard. A cross-sectional validation study was conducted in the Radiology Department of Fauji Foundation Hospital from  May 20 to Nov 20, 2017. Children fulfilling the inclusion criteria were selected after informed consent and detailed history was taken for investigation of Rb. B-scan of both eyes was done using 7.5-10 MHz probe, followed by MRI of both eyes in the same patients using 1.5 Tesla MRI machine with the help of qualified MRI technicians. Data analysis was done by SPSS version 16.0. The diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of B-scan in prediction of Rb as compared to MRI was 90.45%, 82.28%, 90.54% and 90.28% respectively. The study concluded that diagnostic accuracy of B-scan as compared to MRI is substantial in Retinoblastoma. Continuous...

Microcalcification-associated breast cancer: HER2-enriched molecular subtype is associated with mammographic features

2018 ◽  
pp. 20170942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhong Nie ◽  
Jian Wang ◽  
Xiao-chun Ji
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Tumor Size ◽  
Breast Tumor ◽  
Molecular Subtype ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Breast Cancers ◽  
Tumor Mass ◽  
Tumor Phenotype ◽  
Mass Lesions ◽  
Small Tumor Size

Purpose: To investigate whether the mammographic features were different between breast cancer HER2-enriched molecular subtype and non-HER2-enriched molecular subtype. Methods: 283 microcalcification-associated breast cancers were identified (HER2-enriched: n = 57; non-HER2-enriched: n = 226). Mammographic tumor mass and calcification features in relation to HER2 molecular subtype were analyzed. Results: On univariate analysis, HER2-enriched molecular subtype rates were significantly higher (a) in tumor size <= 2 cm 33 of 57 [57.9%]) than in tumor size >2 cm lesions (22 of 226 [9.7%]) (p = 0.007), (b) in non-spiculated mass 39 of 57 [68.4%]) than in spiculated mass lesions (18 of 226 [7.9%]) (p = 0.034)，(c) in calcifications extent >2 cm (41of 57 [71.9%]) lesions than in calcifications extent <= 2 cm lesions (16 of 226 [7.1%]) (p < 0.001)and (d) in calcification density ＞20/cm2 (44 of 57 [71.2%]) lesions than in calcification density <= 20/cm2 lesions (13 of 226 [5.8%]) (p = 0.034).On multivariate analysis, three mammographic features (tumor size >2 cm vs size⩽2 cm OR: 0.415 95% CI: 0.215 to 0.802, p = 0.009, spiculated mass vs non-spiculated mass OR: 0.226 95% CI: 0.114 to 0.446, p < 0.001 and calcifications extent >2 cm vs calcifications extent <= 2 cm OR: 7.754, 95% CI: 3.100 to 19.339P < 0.001) were independent predictors. Our results indicated that small tumor size, non-spiculated mass and calcification extent >2 cm are more likely to be HER2 molecular subtype. The discrimination of this model, as quantified by the AUC, was 0.751 (95%CI: 0.701 to 0.854). Conclusion: Our study presents a prediction model that incorporates the mammographic features of tumor size, non-spiculated mass and calcification extent, which can potentially be used to preoperative predict breast cancer HER2-enriched subtype. Advancesinknowledge: Mammographic features can noninvasively visualize breast tumor phenotype characteristics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document