COMPLEX RADIOLOGIC IMAGING OF EARLY BREAST CANCER
Keywords:
Breast cancer screening, microcalcinates, mammography, breast ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography.Abstract
Clinicoradiological diagnosis of early breast cancer – BC (non-invasive or invasive small-sized cancers) is difficult due to the absence of any characteristic clinical symptoms and pathognomonic radiological signs of the malignant process. Screening of BC has shown to be one of the most successful projects for early diagnosis of malignancies, but the probability to receive false negative results using screening mammography reaches 12%, and, on the one hand, this is due to interval cancers, and on the other hand – to defects in the primary screening. Among the factors associated with the likelihood of ineffective screening of BC, the most authors highlight such as high breast density, preceding the breast biopsy for a benign process, young age, as well as the use of hormone replacement therapy. The main methods of instrumental BC diagnostics are mammography, ultrasound (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET). Mammography is the "gold standard" for both screening and best diagnostics, but is characterized by a high proportion of both false positive and false negative results, and this can be partially solved by the use of digital mammography with tomosynthesis (performing a series of mammography images obtained at different angles and producing the focused 3-D images).. Contrast enhanced mammography allows to identify angiogenesis in the area of the predicted malignancy, but is characterized by a high radiation exposure. Breast ultrasound is characterized by low specificity of the method and the high dependence of the result of data interpretation depending on physician qualifications. MRI of the breast for screening is characterized by high sensitivity, but also high cost and high proportion of false positive results. The role of PET/computer tomography in the diagnosis of early BC remains unclear, and the informative value of research in patients with nonpalpable tumors is extremely low. The radiological picture of early BC is widely variable; characteristic features include the presence of clustered calcifications, lumps with jagged edges, rough multinodular lumps. However, in a significant proportion of women the only manifestation of early BC is the presence of microcalcinates. Careful analysis of the localization and the shape of microcalcinates and basic characteristics allows correctly interpret the roentgenological diagnosis and helps to choose the optimal diagnostic and treatment algorithm.
References
GLOBOCAN 2018; IACR, WHO, 2018. http://gco.iarc.fr/today
Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2017 году (заболеваемость и смертность). Под ред. А.Д.Каприна, В.В.Старинского, Г.В.Петровой. М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена – филиал ФГБУ «НМИЦ радиологии» Минздрава России, 2018. [Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2017 (morbidity and mortality). Ed. A.D.Kaprin, V.V.Stalinskii, G.V.Petrov. Moscow, Herzen MNIOI – branch of NMHC, 2018 (in Russian).]
Gotzsche PC, Jorgensen KJ. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 6: CD001877.
Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK et al. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002; 137 (5 Part 1): 347–60.
Slawson DC, Coates ML. Efficacy of screening mammography. J Fam Pract 1995; 40 (6): 602–3. 6. Nelson HD, O'Meara ES, Kerlikowske K et al. Factors Associated With Rates of False-Positive and False-Negative Results From Digital Mammography Screening: An Analysis of Registry Data. Ann Intern Med 2016; 164 (4): 226–35.
Chan CH, Coopey SB, Freer PE et al. False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2015; 153 (3): 699–702.
Christiansen CL, Wang F, Barton MB et al. Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms. J Natl Cancer Ins 2000; 92 (20): 1657–66.
LМng K, NergМrden M, Andersson I et al. False positives in breast cancer screening with one-view breast tomosynthesis: An analysis of findings leading to recall, work-up and biopsy rates in the MalmЪ Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial. Eur Radiol 2016; 26 (11): 3899–907.
Hofvind S, Skaane P, Vitak B et al. Influence of review design on percentages of missed interval breast cancers: retrospective study of interval cancers in a population-based screening program. Radiology 2005; 237 (2): 437–43.