Pathologic Tumor Size versus Mammography, Sonography, and MRI in Breast Cancer Based on Pathologic Subtypes

Author:

Nonnemacher Cory J.12ORCID,Dale Paul2,Scott Anthony2,Bonner Mary2

Affiliation:

1. Medical Center of Central Georgia, Macon, GA, USA

2. Atrium Health Navicent The Medical Center, Macon, GA, USA

Abstract

Introduction The standard of care for imaging of breast pathology has historically been mammography and sonography. MRI is a modern adjunct in the surgeon’s toolkit. We looked to examine the differences in imaging modalities and their ability to predict the size in relation to the pathologic size after excision with focus on pathologic subtypes. Methods We analyzed patient records across a 4-year period from 2017 to 2021 who were treated surgically for breast cancer at our facility. We used a retrospective chart review to collect measurements that were recorded of the tumors by the radiologist for available mammography, ultrasound, and MRI which were compared to pathology report measurements of the final specimens. We subdivided the results by pathologic subtypes including invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Results 658 total patients met criteria for analysis. Mammography overestimated specimens with DCIS by 1.93 mm ( P = .15), US underestimated by .56 (.55), and MRI overestimated by 5.77 mm ( P < .01). There was no statistically significant difference in any modalities with IDC. With specimens of ILC, all 3 imaging modalities underestimated tumor size, with only US being significant. Discussion Mammography and MRI consistently overestimated tumor size with the exception of ILC while US underestimated tumor size on all pathologic subtypes. MRI significantly overestimated tumor size in DCIS by 5.77 mm. Mammography was the most accurate imaging modality for all pathologic subtypes and never had a statistically significant difference from actual tumor size.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3