[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
IJRR Information::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Subscription::
News & Events::
Web Mail::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
ISSN
Hard Copy 2322-3243
Online 2345-4229
..
Online Submission
Now you can send your articles to IJRR office using the article submission system.
..

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE

:: Volume 22, Issue 1 (1-2024) ::
Int J Radiat Res 2024, 22(1): 49-54 Back to browse issues page
Study on diagnostic value of ultrasound combined with mammography in breast cancer with different clinical and pathological features
Y. Xu , J. Qian , F. Wang , Y. Chen
Department of Breast Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310009, China , cyd963136@163.com
Abstract:   (600 Views)
Background: To assess the diagnostic value of ultrasound (US) combined with mammography in breast cancer with different clinical and pathological features. Materials and Methods: Totally 340 female patients with breast cancer were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent color ultrasound and mammography examination and the diagnostic efficiency in breast cancer with different clinical and pathological features was assessed. Results: The diagnostic sensitivity of ultrasound in breast cancer with different Body Mass Index (BMI), initial symptom, histological grade, and hormone receptor (HR) status was similar. The diagnostic sensitivity of mammography in breast cancer with different histological grade, HR status and Ki-67 positive rate was similar. However, the diagnostic sensitivity of ultrasound and mammography was higher in age ≥50 years, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive patients. The diagnostic sensitivity of ultrasound in Ki-67 positive rate >20 was higher than that in Ki-67 positive rate ≤20. The diagnostic sensitivity of mammography was higher in BMI >30 and in the initial symptom with calcification. Moreover, in different molecular subtypes, the diagnostic sensitivity of ultrasound and mammography in HR+HER2+ was the highest, followed by HR-HER2+, HR-HER2- and HR+HER2-. The diagnostic efficiency of ultrasound combined with mammography in different age, BMI, initial symptom, histological grade and HR status was similar. In addition, the diagnostic efficiency of ultrasound combined with mammography was higher than single ultrasound and mammography. Conclusion: Ultrasound combined with mammography showed high diagnostic efficiency in breast cancer with different clinical and pathological features was high, and is worthy for clinical promotion.
Keywords: Breast cancer, ultrasound, mammography, cancer diagnosis.
Full-Text [PDF 592 kb]   (218 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Radiation Biology
References
1. 1. Zhang YN, Xia KR, Li CY, et al. (2021) Review of breast cancer pathologigcal image processing. Biomed Res Int, 2021: 1994764. [DOI:10.1155/2021/1994764]
2. Eshaghi M (2020) The effect of pain management on pain reduction in women with breast cancer. SJMSHM, 2(2) :1-5. [DOI:10.29252/sjmshm.2.2.1]
3. Murali B, Durbin L, Vijaykumar S, et al. (2022) Treatment of HR+/HER2- breast cancer in urban mainland China: results from the CancerMPact Survey 2019. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 195(3): 441-51. [DOI:10.1007/s10549-022-06709-x]
4. Reid S, Haddad D, Tezak A, et al. (2021) Impact of molecular subtype and race on HR+, HER2- breast cancer survival. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 189(3): 845-52. [DOI:10.1007/s10549-021-06342-0]
5. Coughlin SS (2019) Epidemiology of breast cancer in women. Adv Exp Med Biol, 1152: 9-29. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-20301-6_2]
6. Peairs KS, Choi Y, Stewart RW, et al. (2017) Screening for breast cancer. Semin Oncol, 44(1): 60-72. [DOI:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2017.02.004]
7. Johnson RH, Anders CK, Litton JK, et al. (2018) Breast cancer in adolescents and young adults. Pediatr Blood Cancer, 65(12): e27397. [DOI:10.1002/pbc.27397]
8. Harbeck N and Gnant M (2017) Breast cancer. Lancet (London, England), 389(10074): 1134-50. [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31891-8]
9. Chen L, Jiang N, Wu Y (2020) Application and analysis of biomedical imaging technology in early diagnosis of breast cancer. Methods Mol Biol, 2204: 63-73. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-0716-0904-0_6]
10. Sood R, Rositch AF, Shakoor D, et al. (2019) Ultrasound for breast cancer detection globally: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Glob Oncol, 5: 1-17. [DOI:10.1200/JGO.19.00127]
11. Ozmen N, Dapp R, Zapf M, et al. (2015) Comparing different ultrasound imaging methods for breast cancer detection. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, 62(4): 637-46. [DOI:10.1109/TUFFC.2014.006707]
12. Fiorica JV (2016) Breast cancer screening, mammography, and other modalities. Clin Obstet Gynecol, 59(4): 688-709. [DOI:10.1097/GRF.0000000000000246]
13. Helvie MA and Bevers TB (2018) Screening mammography for average-risk women: The controversy and nccn's position. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN, 16(11): 1398-404. [DOI:10.6004/jnccn.2018.7081]
14. van den Ende C, Oordt-Speets AM, Vroling H, et al. (2017) Benefits and harms of breast cancer screening with mammography in women aged 40-49 years: A systematic review. International Journal of Cancer, 141(7): 1295-306. [DOI:10.1002/ijc.30794]
15. Wang Y, Li Y, Song Y, et al. (2022) Comparison of ultrasound and mammography for early diagnosis of breast cancer among Chinese women with suspected breast lesions: A prospective trial. Thoracic cancer, 13(22): 3145-51. [DOI:10.1111/1759-7714.14666]
16. Ohnuki K, Tohno E, Tsunoda H, et al. (2021) Overall assessment system of combined mammography and ultrasound for breast cancer screening in Japan. Breast Cancer, 28(2): 254-62. [DOI:10.1007/s12282-020-01203-y]
17. Lehman CD, Arao RF, Sprague BL, et al. (2017) National performance benchmarks for modern screening digital mammography: Update from the breast cancer surveillance consortium. Radiology, 283(1): 49-58. [DOI:10.1148/radiol.2016161174]
18. Conant EF, Barlow WE, Herschorn SD, et al. (2019) Association of digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography with cancer detection and recall rates by age and breast density. JAMA Oncology, 5(5): 635-42. [DOI:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.7078]
19. Radiology ACo, D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, et al. (2013)ACR BI-RADS Atlas: breast imaging reporting and data system; mammography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, follow-up and outcome monitoring, data dictionary. ACR, American College of Radiology,
20. Barzaman K, Karami J, Zarei Z, et al. (2020) Breast cancer: Biology, biomarkers, and treatments. Int Immunopharmacol, 84: 106535. [DOI:10.1016/j.intimp.2020.106535]
21. He H, Zhang G, Zhou H, et al. (2022) Differential efficacy of b-ultrasound combined with molybdenum target detection mode for breast cancer staging and correlation of blood flow parameters with IGF-1 and IGF-2 expression level and prognosis. Contrast Media Mol Imaging, 2022: 9198626. [DOI:10.1155/2022/9198626]
22. Hu Y, Zhang Y, Cheng J (2019) Diagnostic value of molybdenum target combined with DCE-MRI in different types of breast cancer. Oncol Lett, 18(4): 4056-63. [DOI:10.3892/ol.2019.10746]
23. Sechopoulos I, Teuwen J, Mann R (2021) Artificial intelligence for breast cancer detection in mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: State of the art. Semin Cancer Biol, 72: 214-25. [DOI:10.1016/j.semcancer.2020.06.002]
24. Lee CU, Hesley GK, Uthamaraj S, et al. (2021) Using ultrasound color doppler twinkling to identify biopsy markers in the breast and axilla. Ultrasound Med Biol, 47(11): 3122-34. [DOI:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.04.018]
25. Zhou BY, Wang LF, Yin HH, et al. (2021) Decoding the molecular subtypes of breast cancer seen on multimodal ultrasound images using an assembled convolutional neural network model: A prospective and multicentre study. EBioMedicine, 74: 103684. [DOI:10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103684]
26. Yeo SH, Kim GR, Lee SH, et al. (2018) Comparison of ultrasound elastography and color doppler ultrasonography for distinguishing small triple-negative breast cancer from fibroadenoma. J Ultrasound Med, 37(9): 2135-46. [DOI:10.1002/jum.14564]
27. Zhou J, Jin AQ, Zhou SC, et al. (2021) Application of preoperative ultrasound features combined with clinical factors in predicting HER2-positive subtype (non-luminal) breast cancer. BMC Med Imaging, 21(1): 184. [DOI:10.1186/s12880-021-00714-0]
28. Liu J, Wang X, Hu M, et al. (2022) Development of an ultrasound-based radiomics nomogram to preoperatively predict Ki-67 expression level in patients with breast cancer. Front Oncol, 12: 963925. [DOI:10.3389/fonc.2022.963925]
29. Graeser M, Schrading S, Gluz O, et al. (2021) Magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound for prediction of residual tumor size in early breast cancer within the ADAPT subtrials. Breast Cancer Res, 23(1): 36. [DOI:10.1186/s13058-021-01413-y]
30. Mackenzie A, Warren LM, Wallis MG, et al. (2016) Breast cancer detection rates using four different types of mammography detectors. Eur Radiol, 26(3): 874-83. [DOI:10.1007/s00330-015-3885-y]
31. Um E, Kang JW, Lee S, et al. (2018) Comparing accuracy of mammography and magnetic resonance imaging for residual calcified lesions in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Clin Breast Cancer, 18(5): e1087-e91. [DOI:10.1016/j.clbc.2018.03.011]
32. Ultrasound as an Adjunct to Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening(2016): A Health Technology Assessment. Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series, 16(15): 1-71.
33. Ha SM, Chang JM, Lee SH, et al. (2021) Detection of contralateral breast cancer using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer: Comparison with combined mammography and whole-breast ultrasound. Korean J Radiol, 22(6): 867-79. [DOI:10.3348/kjr.2020.1183]
34. Devkota R, Bhattarai M, Adhikari BB, et al. (2021) Evaluation of breast mass by mammography and ultrasonography with histopathological correlation. J Nepal Health Res Counc, 19(3): 487-93.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Xu Y, Qian J, Wang F, Chen Y. Study on diagnostic value of ultrasound combined with mammography in breast cancer with different clinical and pathological features. Int J Radiat Res 2024; 22 (1) :49-54
URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-5212-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 22, Issue 1 (1-2024) Back to browse issues page
International Journal of Radiation Research
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 49 queries by YEKTAWEB 4652