Preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM)
- 24 Downloads
The aim of our study was to assess the performance of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) in the preoperative loco-regional staging of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) patients, about the valuation of the extension of disease and in measurement of lesions. Then, we selected retrospectively, among the 1500 patients underwent to CEDM at the Breast Diagnostics Department of the Careggi University Hospital of Florence and the National Cancer Institute of Milan from September 2016 to November 2018, 31 women (mean age 57.1 aa; range 41–78 aa) with a definitive histological diagnosis of ILC. CEDM has proved to be a promising imaging technique, being characterized by a sensitivity of 100% in the detection of the index lesion, and of 84.2% in identifying any adjunctive lesions: It was the presence of a non-mass enhancement (NME) to lower the sensitivity of the technique (25% vs. 100% for mass-like enhancements or a mass closely associated with a NME). Specificity in the characterization of additional lesions was 66.7%, and the diagnosis of the extension of disease was correct in 77.4% of cases: NME also led to a decrease in diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of disease extension up to 40% versus 85% for masses and 80% for masses associated with NME (M/NME). Moreover, in 12/31 (38.7%), CEDM allowed to correctly identify lesions not shown by mammography + ultrasonography + tomosynthesis: In the half of these (6/12), there was a multicentricity, thus allowing an adequate surgical planning change. CEDM was also very accurate in analyzing the maximum diameter of the masses, while it was much less reliable in the case of the M/NME and pure NME. In conclusion, CEDM is a new promising imaging technique in the loco-regional preoperative staging and in the evaluation of disease extension for ILC, especially in case of mass enhancement lesions.
KeywordsBreast Contrast-enhanced digital mammography Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography Invasive lobular breast cancer Breast cancer staging
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee: “Regione Toscana, Comitato Etico Area Vasta Centro, reference number: SPE_16.251” and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 4.Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849Google Scholar
- 11.Selvi V, Nori J, Meattini I, Francolini G, Morelli N, De Benedetto D, Bicchierai G, Di Naro F, Gill MK, Orzalesi L, Sanchez L, Susini T, Bianchi S, Livi L, Miele V (2018) Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative staging and work-up of patients affected by invasive lobular carcinoma or invasive ductolobular carcinoma. Biomed Res Int. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1569060 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 12.ACR Guidelines and Standards Committee (2008) ACR practice guideline for the performance of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breastGoogle Scholar
- 18.Bernardi D, Belli P, Benelli E et al (2017) Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): recommendations from the Italian College of BreastRadiologists (ICBR) by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) and the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa). Radiol Med 122(10):723–730PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Bicchierai G, Nori J, De Benedetto D, Boeri C, Vanzi E, Bianchi S, Kaur Gill M, Cirone D, Miele V (2018) Role of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the post biopsy management of B3 lesions: preliminary results. Tumori J 17:300891618816212Google Scholar
- 24.Bicchierai G, Di Naro F, Amato F (2018) CEDM lexicon and imaging interpretation tips. In: Nori J, Kaur M (eds) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM), chapter. 9; pp 93–118. Springer, Berlin. ISBN 978-3-319- 94552-1. eBook ISBN 978-3-319-94553-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94553-8_9 Google Scholar
- 25.D’Orsi CJACR (2013) BI-RADS atlas: breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, RestonGoogle Scholar
- 26.Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS® magnetic resonance imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, RestonGoogle Scholar
- 36.Carin Anne-julie, Molière Sébastien, Gabriele Victor, Lodi Massimo, Thiébaut Nicolas, Neuberger Karl, Mathelin Carole (2017) Relevance of breast MRI in determining the size and focality of invasive breast cancer treated by mastectomy: a prospective study. World J Surg Oncol 15:128. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-017-1197-1 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 42.Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B, Senn H-J (2013) Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 24(9):2206–2223PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 43.Jiang Yi-Zhou, Xia Chen, Peng Wen-Ting, Ke-Da Yu, Zhuang Zhi-Gang, Shao Zhi-Ming (2014) Preoperative measurement of breast cancer overestimates tumor size compared to pathological measurement. PLoS ONE 9(1):e86676. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0086676 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 49.Iorfida Monica, Maiorano Eugenio, Orvieto Enrico, Maisonneuve Patrick, Bottiglieri Luca, Rotmensz Nicole, Montagna Emilia, Dellapasqua Silvia, Veronesi Paolo, Galimberti Viviana, Luini Alberto, Goldhirsch Aaron, Colleoni Marco, Viale Giuseppe (2012) Invasive lobular breast cancer: subtypes and outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat 133:713–723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2002-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar