Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mammographic Signs of Breast Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis

Abstract

The effectiveness of screening mammography in reducing mortality from breast cancer has been well documented in several randomized clinical trials. Mammographic signs of breast cancer cover a wide spectrum including the commonly encountered irregular spiculated masses, pleomorphic microcalcifications, as well as asymmetry and architectural distortion. There are certain mammographic signs that are subtle, and these account for a significant number of missed cancers. Such subtle signs include small developing densities or findings that are obscured by dense glandular tissue. The mammographic signs of breast cancer and the differential diagnosis are discussed in this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Venkatesan A, Chu P, Kerlikowske K, Sickles E, Smith-Bindman R. Positive predictive value of specific mammographic findings according to reader and patient variables. Radiology. 2009;250(3):648–57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Gajdos C, Tartler PI, Bleiweiss IJ. Mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer reflects pathologic characteristics. Ann Surg. 2002;235(2):246–51.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171(1):35–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sickles EA. Breast masses: mammographic evaluation. Radiology. 1989;173(2):297–303.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). 4th ed. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Woods RW, Sisney GS, Salkowski LR, Shinki K, Lin Y, Burnside ES. The mammographic density of a mass is a significant predictor of breast cancer. Radiology. 2011;258(2):417–25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Woods RW, Oliphant L, Shinki K, Page D, Shavlik J, Burnside E. Validation of results from knowledge discovery: mass density as a predictor of breast cancer. J Digit Imaging. 2010;23(5):554–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Tamaki K, Ishida T, Miyashita M, Amari M, Ohuchi N, Tamaki N, Sasano H. Correlation between mammographic findings and corresponding histopathology: potential predictors for biological characteristics of breast diseases. Cancer Sci. 2011;102(12):2179–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Thurfjell MG, Lindgren A, Thurfjell E. Nonpalpable breast cancer: mammographic appearance as predictor of histologic type. Radiology. 2002;222(1):165–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Reiff DB, Cooke J, Griffin M, Given-Wilson R. Ductal carcinoma in situ presenting as a stellate lesion on mammography. Clin Radiol. 1994;49:396–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Thurfjell E, Thurfjell MG, Lindgren A. Mammographic finding as predictor of survival in 1–9 mm invasive breast cancers. Worse prognosis for cases presenting as calcifications alone. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2001;67(2):177–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ikeda DM, Anderson I. Ductal carcinoma in situ: atypical mammographic appearances. Radiology. 1989;172:661–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sekine K, et al. DCIS showing architectural distortion on screening mammogram – comparison of mammographic and pathological findings. Breast Cancer. 2007;14(3):281–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lopez JK, Bassett LW. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: spectrum of mammographic, US, and MR imaging findings. Radiographics. 2009;29:165–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tabar L, Dean PB. Stellate lesions. In: Tabar L, Dean PB, editors. Teaching atlas of mammography. Second revised. New York: Georg Thieme Verlag; 1985. p. 87–136.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kennedy M, Masterson AV, Kerin M, Flanagan F. Pathology and clinical relevance of radial scars: a review. J Clin Pathol. 2003;56(10):721–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Neilsen M, Christensen L, Anderson J. Radial scars in women with breast cancer. Cancer. 1987;59:1019–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ciatto S, Morrone D, Catarzi S, et al. Radial scars of the breast: review of 38 consecutive mammographic diagnoses. Radiology. 1993;187:757–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. King TA, Scharfenberg JC, Smetherman DH, et al. A better understanding of the term radial scar. Am J Surg. 2000;180(6):428–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Cohen MA, Sferlazza SJ. Role of sonography in evaluation of radial scars of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:1075–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Shetty MK. Radial scars of the breast: sonographic findings. Ultrasound Q. 2002;18(3):203–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Finlay ME, Liston JE, Lunt LG, et al. Assessment of the role of ultrasound in the differentiation of radial scars and stellate carcinomas of the breast. Clin Radiol. 1994;49:52–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Shaheen R, Schimmelpenninck CA, Stoddart L, Raymond H, Slanetz PJ. Spectrum of diseases presenting as architectural distortion on mammography: multimodality radiologic imaging with pathologic correlation. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2011;32(4):351–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Taşkin F, Köseoğlu K, Unsal A, Erkuş M, Ozbaş S, Karaman C. Sclerosing adenosis of the breast: radiologic appearance and efficiency of core needle biopsy. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2011;17(4):311–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Günhan-Bilgen I, Memiş A, Ustün EE, Ozdemir N, Erhan Y. Sclerosing adenosis: mammographic and ultrasonographic findings with clinical and histopathological correlation. Eur J Radiol. 2002;44(3):232–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hogge JP, Robinson RE, Magnant CM, Zuurbier RA. The mammographic spectrum of fat necrosis of the breast. Radiographics. 1995;15(6):1347–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. DiPiro PJ, Meyer JE, Frenna TH, Denison CM. Seat belt injuries of the breast: findings on mammography and sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;164(2):317–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Demitri-Lewis A, Slaentz PJ, Eisneberg RL. Breast calcifications: the focal group. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:W325–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bird RE. Critical pathways in analyzing breast microcalcifications. Radiographics. 1995;15:928–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Stomper PC, Geradts J, Edge SB, Levine EG. Mammographic predictors of the presence and size of invasive carcinomas associated with malignant microcalcifications lesions without a mass. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181:1679–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Samardar P, Shaw de Paredes E, Grimes MM, Wilson JD. Focal asymmetric densities seen at mammography: US and pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2002;22:19–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sickles EA. The spectrum of breast asymmetries: imaging features, work-up, management. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007;45(5):765–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sickles EA. Findings at mammographic screening on only one standard projection: outcomes analysis. Radiology. 1998;208(2):471–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kopans DB, Swan CA, White G, et al. Asymmetric breast tissue. Radiology. 1989;171(3):639–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Leung JWT, Sickles EA. Developing asymmetry identified on mammography: correlation with imaging outcome and pathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(3):667–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sickles EA. Mammographic features of 300 consecutive nonpalpable breast cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986;146:661–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Shetty MK, Watson AB. Sonographic evaluation of focal asymmetric density of the breast. Ultrasound Q. 2002;18(2):115–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Youk JH, Kim E, Ko KH, et al. Asymmetric mammographic findings based on the fourth edition of BI-RADS: types, evaluation, and management. Radiographics. 2009;29(1):1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Brenner RJ. Strategies in the evaluation of breast asymmetries. Appl Radiol. 1998;27:15–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Reed SD, Buist DS, Anderson ML, Bowles EJ, Fitzgibbons D, Seger D, Newton KM. Short-term (1–2 mo) hormone therapy cessation before mammography. Menopause. 2009;16(6):1125–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Buist DS, Anderson ML, Reed SD, Aiello Bowles EJ, Fitzgibbons ED, Gandara JC, Seger D, Newton KM. Short-term hormone therapy suspension and mammography recall: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150(11):752–65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Performance measures for 1,960,150 screening mammography examinations from 2002 to 2006 by age – based on BCSC data as of 2009 NCI-funded Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium co-operative agreement (U01CA63740, U01CA86076, U01CA86082, U01CA63736, U01CA70013, U01CA69976, U01CA63731, U01CA70040). Downloaded from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium Web site. http://breastscreening.cancer.gov/data/performance/screening/2009/perf_age.html.

  43. Majid AS, Parades ES, Doherty RD, Sharma NR, Salvador X. Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls. Radiographics. 2003;23:881–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Roberts-Klein S, Iuanow E, Slaentz PJ. Avoiding pitfalls in mammographic interpretation. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2011;62:50–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, O’Shaughnessy KF, Brenner RJ, Sickles EA. Analysis of 172 subtle findings on prior normal mammograms in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening. Radiology. 2003;226:494–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Berlin L. Missed mammographic abnormalities, malpractice, and expert witnesses: does majority rule in the courtroom? [letter]. Radiology. 2003;229:288–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Harvey JA, Fajardo LL, Innis CA. Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. 1993 ARRS President’s Award. Am J Roentgenol. 1993;161:1167–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Destounis SV, DiNitto P, Logan-Young W, Bonaccio E, Zuley ML, Willison KM. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience. Radiology. 2004;232(2):578–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, O’Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA, Brenner RJ. Computer-aided detection output on 172 subtle findings on normal mammograms previously obtained in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening mammography. Radiology. 2004;230(3):811–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Noble M, Bruening W, Uhl S, Schoelles K. Computer aided detection mammography for breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009;279(6):881–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Giess CS, Frost EP, Birdwell RL. Difficulties and errors in diagnosis of breast neoplasms. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2012;33:288–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Brenner RJ. False-negative mammograms: medical, legal, and risk management implications. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000;38:741–57.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Bird RE, Wallace TW, Yankaskas BC. Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. Radiology. 1992;184:613–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Goergen SK, Evans J, Cohen GP, et al. Characteristics of breast carcinomas missed by screening radiologists. Radiology. 1997;204:131–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Wolfe JN. Mammography: ducts as a sole indicator of breast carcinoma. Radiology. 1967;89:206–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Huynh PT, Parellada JA, de Paredes ES, et al. Dilated duct pattern at mammography. Radiology. 1997;204:137–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Chang CB, Lvoff NM, Leung JW, et al. Solitary dilated duct identified at mammography: outcomes analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:378–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Crowe DJ, Helvie MA, Wilson TE, Crowe DJ. Breast infection. Mammographic and sonographic findings with clinical correlation. Invest Radiol. 1995;30(10):582–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Kwak JY, Kim EK, Chung SY, You JK, Oh KK, Lee YH, et al. Unilateral breast edema: spectrum of etiologies and imaging appearances. Yonsei Med J. 2005;46:1–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. An YY, Kim SH, Cha ES, et al. Diffuse infiltrative lesion of the breast: clinical and radiologic features. Korean J Radiol. 2011;12(1):113–21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Han BK, Choe YH, Park JM, Moon WK, Ko YH, Yang JH, et al. Granulomatous mastitis: mammographic and sonographic appearances. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:317–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Levine PH, Steinhorn SC, Ries LG, Aron JL. Inflammatory breast cancer: the experience of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) program. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1985;74:291–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Chang S, Parker SL, Pham T, Buzdar AU, Hursting SD. Inflammatory breast carcinoma incidence and survival: the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program of the National Cancer Institute, 1975–1992. Cancer. 1998;82:2366–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Hance KW, Anderson WF, Devesa SS, Young HA, Levine PH. Trends in inflammatory breast carcinoma incidence and survival: the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program at the National Cancer Institute. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:966–75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Yang WT, Le-Petross HT, Macapinlac H, et al. Inflammatory breast cancer: PET/CT, MRI, mammography, and sonography findings. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;109(3):417–26.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Dershaw DD, Moore MP, Liberman L, et al. Inflammatory breast carcinoma: mammographic findings. Radiology. 1994;190:831–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Lee B, Tannenbaum N. Inflammatory carcinoma of the breast: a report of twenty-eight cases from the breast clinic of memorial hospital. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1924;39:580–5.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Droulias CA, Sewell CW, McSweeney MB, et al. Inflammatory carcinoma of the breast: a correlation of clinical, radiologic and pathologic findings. Ann Surg. 1976;184:217–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Gunhan-Bilgen I, Ustun EE, Memis A. Inflammatory breast carcinoma: mammographic, ultrasonographic, clinical, and pathologic findings in 142 cases. Radiology. 2002;223:829–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Kushwaha AC, Whitman GJ, Stelling CB, et al. Primary inflammatory carcinoma of the breast: retrospective review of mammographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:535–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Caumo F, Gaioni MB, Bonetti F, et al. Occult inflammatory breast cancer: review of clinical, mammographic, US and pathologic signs. Radiol Med (Torino). 2005;109:308–20.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Tardivon AA, Viala J, CorvellecRudelli A, et al. Mammographic patterns of inflammatory breast carcinoma: a retrospective study of 92 cases. Eur J Radiol. 1997;24:124–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Lee KW, Chung SY, Yang I, et al. Inflammatory breast cancer: imaging findings. Clin Imaging. 2005;29(22–250):1014–24.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Shetty MK, Carpenter WS. Sonographic evaluation of isolated abnormal axillary lymph nodes identified on mammograms. J Ultrasound Med. 2004;23(1):63–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Given-Wilson RM, Murray ME. The clinical importance of axillary lymphadenopathy detected on screening mammography. Clin Radiol. 1997;52:458–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Bergvist L, Frodis E, Hedborg-Mellander C, Hansen J. Management of accidentally found pathological lymph nodes on routine screening mammography. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1996;22:250–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Lee LH, Giurescu ME, Philpotts LE, Horvath LJ, Tocino I. Clinical importance of unilaterally enlarging lymph nodes on otherwise normal mammograms. Radiology. 1997;203:329–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Görkem SB, O’Connell AM. Abnormal axillary lymph nodes on negative mammograms: causes other than breast cancer. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2012;18(5):473–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Walsh R, Kornuguth PJ, Soo MS, Bentley R, Delong DM. Axillary lymph nodes: mammographic, pathologic and clinical correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168:33–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Rahbar H, Partridge SC, Javid SH, Lehman CD. Imaging axillary lymph nodes in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2012;41(5):149–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Dershaw DD, Van Zee KJ, Abramson AF, Liberman L. MR imaging of the breast in patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Radiology. 1997;205:437–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn AI, Bontenbal M, Oudkerk M. MRI in patients with axillary metastases of occult breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1997;44:179–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Obdeijn IM, Brouwers-Kuyper EM, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Wiggers T, Oudkerk M. MR imaging-guided sonography followed by fine-needle aspiration cytology in occult carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:1079–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Lin NU, Vanderplas A, Hughes ME, et al. Clinicopathological features and sites of recurrence according to breast cancer subtype in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(15s):Abstr 543.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Yang WT, Dryden M, Broglio K, et al. Mammographic features of triple receptor negative primary breast cancers in young premenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;111:405–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Wang Y, Ikeda DM, Narasimhan B, et al. Estrogen receptor-negative invasive breast cancer: imaging features of tumors with and without human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 over expression. Radiology. 2008;246:367–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Dogan BE, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Gilcrease M, et al. Multimodality imaging of triple receptor-negative tumors with mammography, ultrasound, and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:1160–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Kojima Y, Tsunoda H. Mammography and ultrasound feature of triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer. 2011;18:146–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Kojima Y, Tsunoda H, Honda S, Kikuchi M, Kawauchi N, Yoshida A, Yagata H, Yamauchi H, Suzuki K. Radiographic features for triple negative ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer. 2011;18(3):213–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Krecke KN, Gisvold JJ. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic findings and extent of disease at diagnosis in 184 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993;161(5):957–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004;233(3):830–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Selinko VL, Middleton LP, Dempsey PJ. Role of sonography in diagnosing and staging invasive lobular carcinoma. J Clin Ultrasound. 2004;32(7):323–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Hilleren DJ, Andersson IT, Lindholm K, Linnell FS. Invasive lobular carcinoma: mammographic findings in a 10-year experience. Radiology. 1991;178(1):149–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Le Gal M, Ollivier L, Asselain B, et al. Mammographic features of 455 invasive lobular carcinomas. Radiology. 1992;185(3):705–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Butler RS, Venta LA, Wiley EL, Ellis RL, Dempsey PJ, Rubin E. Sonographic evaluation of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172(2):325–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Paramagul CP, Helvie MA, Adler DD. Invasive lobular carcinoma: sonographic appearance and role of sonography in improving diagnostic sensitivity. Radiology. 1995;195(1):231–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Evans WP, Warren Burhenne LJ, Laurie L, O’Shaughnessy KF, Castellino RA. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic characteristics and computer- computer-aided detection. Radiology. 2002;225(1):182–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM

  2. Woman’s Center for Breast Care and MRI, Woman’s Hospital of Texas, Fannin 7600, Houston, TX, 77054, USA

    Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM

Authors
  1. Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Woman's Hospital of TexasWomen's Department of Radiology,, Baylor College of Medicine, Centre for Breast Care and MRI., Houston, Texas, USA

    Mahesh K Shetty

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shetty, M.K. (2015). Mammographic Signs of Breast Cancer. In: Shetty, M. (eds) Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1267-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1267-4_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1266-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1267-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation