Abstract
Purpose: To assess the sensitivity of diagnostic tools in detection of multicentric/multifocal foci in breast cancer.
Patients and Methods: The study is conducted retrospectively in 209 breast cancer patients operated in our clinic between 2006 – 2009 to detect multicentric/multifocal tumors. The ages of patients, the number of tumor foci, the sizes of tumor foci and the invasiveness of the carcinoma have been identified. Evaluation of the sensitivity of the diagnostic methods in detecting the tumor foci was performed based on the pathological reports of the breast cancer patients.
Results: Forty patients out of the 209 breast cancer cases were detected to have multifocal/multicentric tumor foci and the number of foci detected was 88. The mean age of the patients was 54.1±14.87 years and the age range was 33 – 87 years. The most prominent number of foci is 2 (85%). The tumor was invasive in nature in 81.8% of the foci. The most sensitive imaging technique to detect the multifocal/ multicentric foci was magnetic resonance imaging (94.3%). The sensitivity of ultrasonography, mammography and physical examination in detection of multifocal/multicentric foci were 80.7%, 78.4% and 48.9%, respectively. Moreover, magnetic resonance imaging was found to be successful in detecting all tumor foci over 5 mm in size, independently from the invasiveness of the carcinoma.
Conclusion: Magnetic resonance imaging is a successful imaging method in effective surgical treatment of breast cancer for detecting multifocal/multicentric tumor foci.
Keywords:
Breast cancer, Magnetic resonance imaging, Multifocality, Multicentricity
References
1Bozfakıoğlu Y, Özmen V, Ünal M, Müslümanoğlu M. Meme Kanseri. Cilt 1. Nobel Kitabevi, İstanbul, 2002; 557-561.
2Baring CC, Squires TS, Tang T. Cancer Statistics 1993. CA Cancer J Clin 1993; 43: 4-26.
3Silvenberg E, Lubera J. Cancer Statistics, 1987. CA Cancer J Clin 1987; 37: 2-19.
4Greenlee RT, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics 2000. CA Cancer J Clin 2000; 5: 17-33.
5Moon WK, Noh DY, Im JG. Multifocal, multicentric and contralateral breast cancers: bilateral whole breast US in the preoperative evaluation of patients. Radiology 2002; 224: 569-576.
6Holland R, Veling SH, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH. Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1-2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer 1985; 56: 979-990
7Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, Lord SJ, Warren RM, Dixon JM, Irwig L. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 3248-3258.
8Bleicher RJ, Ciocca RM, Egleston BL, Sesa L, Evers K, Sigurdson ER, Morrow M. Association of routine pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging with time to surgery, mastectomy rate, and margin status. J Am Coll Surg 2009; 209: 180-187.
9Axelrod D, Smith J, Kornreich D, Grinstead E, Singh B, Cangiarella J, Guth AA. Breast cancer in young women. J Am Coll Surg 2008; 206: 1193-1203.
10Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, Jeong JH, Wolmark N. Twenty year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 1233-1241.
11Veronesi U, Saccozzi R, Del Vecchio M, Banfi A, Clemente C, De Lena M, Gallus G, Greco M, Luini A, Marubini E, Muscolino G, Rilke F, Salvadori B, Zecchini A, Zucali R. Comparing radical mastectomy with quadranectomy, axillary dissection and radiotherapy in patients with small cancers of the breast. N Engl J Med 1981; 305: 6-11.
12Sarrazin D, Le MG, Arriagada R, Contesso G, Fontaine F, Spielmann M, Rochard F, Le Chevalier T, Lacour J. Ten-year results of a randomized trial comparing a conservative treatment to mastectomy in early breast cancer. Radiother Oncol 1989; 14: 177-184.
13Van Dongen JA, Bartelink H, Fentiman IS, Lerut T, Mignolet F, Olthuis G, Van der Schueren E, Sylvester R, Winter J, Van Zijl K. Randomized clinical trial to assess the value of breast-conserving therapy in stage I and II breast cancer, EORTC 10801 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1992; 11: 15-18.
14Blichert-Toft M, Rose C, Andersen JA, Overgaard M, Axelsson CK, Andersen KW, Mouridsen HT. Danish randomized trial comparing breast conservation with mastectomy: six years of life-table analysis. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1992; 11: 19-25.
15Grobmyer SR, Mortellaro VE, Marshall J, Higgs GM, Hochwald SN, Mendenhall NP, Copeland EM 3rd, Cance WG. Is there a role for routine use of MRI in selection of patients for breast-conserving cancer therapy? J Am Coll Surg 2008; 206: 1045-1050.
16Majid AS, de Paredes ES, Doherty RD, Sharma NR, Salvador X. Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls. Radiographics 2003; 23: 881-895.
17Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn IM, Bartels KC, de Koning HJ, Oudkerk M. First experiences in screening women at high risk for breast cancer with MR imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2000; 63: 53-60.
18Teifke A, Hlawatsch A, Beier T, Werner Vomweg T, Schadmand S, Schmidt M, Lehr HA, Thelen M. Undetected malignancies of the breast: dynamic contrastenhanced MR imaging at 1.0 T. Radiology 2002; 224: 881-888.
19Hlawatsch A, Teifke A, Schmidt M, Thelen M. Preoperative assessment of breast cancer: sonography versus MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179: 1493-1501.
20Gilles R, Meunier M, Trouffleau P, Divano L, Tardivon A, Vanel D, Hacourt A, Neuenschwander S, Stines J. Diagnosis of infraclinical lesions of the breast with dynamic MRI: results of a prospective and multicenter study. J Radiol 1997; 78: 293-297.
21Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, Ioffe OB. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004; 233: 830-849.
22Hollingsworth AB, Stough RG, O'Dell CA, Brekke CE. Breast magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative locoregional staging. Am J Surg 2008; 196: 389-397.
23Boetes C, Strijk SP, Holland R, Barentsz JO, Van Der Sluis RF, Ruijs JH. Falsenegative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors. Eur Radiol 1997; 7: 1231-1234.
24Rieber A, Merkle E, Böhm W, Brambs HJ, Tomczak R. MRI of histologically confirmed mammary carcinoma: clinical relevance of diagnostic procedures for detection of multifocal or contralateral secondary carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21: 773-779.
25Heywang–Köbrunner SH, Viehweg P, Heinig A, Küchler C. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur J Radiol 1997; 24: 94-108.
26Bone B, Pentek Z, Perbeck L, Veress B. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography and contrast-enhanced MR imaging in 238 histologically verified breast lesions. Acta Radiol 1997; 38: 489-496.
27Bozzini A, Renne G, Meneghetti L, Bandi G, Santos G, Vento AR, Menna S, Andrighetto S, Viale G, Cassano E, Bellomi M. Sensitivity of imaging for multifocalmulticentric breast carcinoma. BMC Cancer 2008; 30: 275.
28Bleicher RJ, Morrow M. MRI and breast cancer: role in detection, diagnosis and staging. Oncology 2007; 21: 1521-1528.
29Schouten van der Velden AP, Boetes C, Bult P, Wobbes T. Magnetic resonance imaging in size assessment of invasive breast carcinoma with an extensive intraductal component. BMC Med Imaging 2009; 9: 5.
30Warner E, Plewes DB, Shumak RS, Catzavelos GC, Di Prospero LS, Yaffe MJ, Goel V, Ramsay E, Chart PL, Cole DE, Taylor GA, Cutrara M, Samuels TH, Murphy JP, Murphy JM, Narod SA. Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 3524-3531.
