nach oben

European Radiology

Erschienen in:

14.08.2015 | Breast

Which factors influence MRI-pathology concordance of tumour size measurements in breast cancer?

verfasst von: M. Rominger, D. Berg, T. Frauenfelder, A. Ramaswamy, N. Timmesfeld

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 5/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To assess MRI-pathology concordance and factors influencing tumour size measurement in breast cancer.

Materials and methods

MRI tumour size (greatest diameter in anatomical planes (MRI-In-Plane) and greatest diameter along main tumour axis (MRI-MPR)) of 115 consecutive breast lesions (59 invasive lobular carcinoma, 46 invasive ductal carcinoma, and 10 ductal carcinoma in situ) was retrospectively compared to size measured at histopathology (pT size (Path-TNM) and greatest tumour diameter as relevant for excision (Path-Diameter; reference standard)). Histopathological tumour types, preoperative palpability, surgical management, additional high-risk lesions, and BI-RADS lesion type (mass versus non-mass enhancements) were assessed as possible influencing factors.

Results

Systematic errors were most pronounced between MRI-MPR and Path-TNM (7.1 mm, limits of agreement (LoA) [-21.7; 35.9]), and were lowest between MRI-In-Plane and Path-Diameter (0.2 mm, LoA [-19.7; 20.1]). Concordance rate of MRI-In-Plane with Path-Diameter was 86 % (97/113), overestimation 9 % (10/113) and underestimation 5 % (6/113); BI-RADS mass lesions were overestimated in 7 % (6/81) versus 41 % (13/32) for non-mass enhancements. On multivariate analysis only BI-RADS lesion type significantly influenced MRI-pathology concordance (p < 0.001). 2/59 (3 %) ILC did not enhance.

Conclusion

Concordance rate varies according to the execution of MRI and histopathological measurements. Beyond this only non-mass enhancement significantly predicted discordance.

Key Points

• Execution and scope of MRI and histopathological size measurements influence concordance rate.

• Non-mass like enhancement predicts discordance.

• Additional high-risk lesions in proximity of tumour do not cause measurement discordance.

• Low percentage of ILC do not enhance at all.

Tot T, Gere M (2008) Radiological-pathological correlation in diagnosing breast carcinoma: the role of pathology in the multimodality era. Pathol Oncol Res 14:173–178CrossRefPubMed

Painter TJ, Dipasco PJ, Misra S, Avisar E (2011) Effect of magnetic resonance imaging on breast conservation therapy versus mastectomy: a review of the literature. Int J Surg Oncol 2011:428653PubMedPubMedCentral

Mann RM, Veltman J, Barentsz JO, Wobbes T, Blickman JG, Boetes C (2008) The value of MRI compared to mammography in the assessment of tumour extent in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Eur J Surg Oncol 34:135–142CrossRefPubMed

Grimsby GM, Gray R, Dueck A et al (2009) Is there concordance of invasive breast cancer pathologic tumor size with magnetic resonance imaging? Am J Surg 198:500–504CrossRefPubMed

Edge S, Byrd D, Compton C (2010) AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th ed

Foote FW, Stewart FW (1946) A histologic classification of carcinoma of the breast. Surgery 19:74–99PubMed

Harris J, Lippman M, Osborne C, Morrow M (2010) Diseases of the breast, 4th ed

Mann RM (2010) The effectiveness of MR imaging in the assessment of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 18:259–276, ix CrossRefPubMed

Tot T (2003) The diffuse type of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: morphology and prognosis. Virchows Arch 443:718–724CrossRefPubMed

10.

Kneeshaw PJ, Turnbull LW, Smith A, Drew PJ (2003) Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging aids the surgical management of invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 29:32–37CrossRefPubMed

11.

Boetes C, Veltman J, van Die L, Bult P, Wobbes T, Barentsz JO (2004) The role of MRI in invasive lobular carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 86:31–37CrossRefPubMed

12.

Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Beljavskaja M et al (2004) Preoperative MRT of the breast in invasive lobular carcinoma in comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma. Röfo 176:544–549PubMed

13.

Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C (2008) MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 107:1–14CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Rodenko GN, Harms SE, Pruneda JM et al (1996) MR imaging in the management before surgery of lobular carcinoma of the breast: correlation with pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:1415–1419CrossRefPubMed

15.

Francis A, England DW, Rowlands DC, Wadley M, Walker C, Bradley SA (2001) The diagnosis of invasive lobular breast carcinoma. Does MRI have a role? Breast 10:38–40CrossRefPubMed

16.

Munot K, Dall B, Achuthan R, Parkin G, Lane S, Horgan K (2002) Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and single-stage surgical resection of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Br J Surg 89:1296–1301CrossRefPubMed

17.

Gümüş H, Mills P, Jones S et al (2012) Invasive lobular carcinoma: the concordance of pathologic tumor size with magnetic resonance imaging. J Breast Heal 8:81–85

18.

Muttalib M, Ibrahem R, Khashan A, Hajaj M (2014) Prospective MRI assessment for invasive lobular breast cancer. Correlation with tumour size at histopathology and influence on surgical management. Clin Radiol 69:23–28CrossRefPubMed

19.

Rosen PP (2008) Rosen’s breast pathology, 3rd ed

20.

(2003) ACR BI-RADS® magnetic resonance imaging, 4th ed. ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast imaging report data syst

21.

Elston CW, Ellis IO (1991) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 19:403–410CrossRefPubMed

22.

Schuh F, Biazús JV, Resetkova E, Benfica CZ, Edelweiss MIA (2010) Reproducibility of three classification systems of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using a web-based survey. Pathol Res Pract 206:705–711CrossRefPubMed

23.

Cilotti A, Iacconi C, Marini C et al (2007) Contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with BI-RADS 3-5 microcalcifications. Radiol Med 112:272–286CrossRefPubMed

24.

Behjatnia B, Sim J, Bassett LW, Moatamed NA, Apple SK (2010) Does size matter? Comparison study between MRI, gross, and microscopic tumor sizes in breast cancer in lumpectomy specimens. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 3:303–309PubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Onesti JK, Mangus BE, Helmer SD, Osland JS (2008) Breast cancer tumor size: correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and pathology measurements. Am J Surg 196:844–848, discussion 849–50CrossRefPubMed

26.

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 233:830–849CrossRefPubMed

27.

McGhan LJ, Wasif N, Gray RJ et al (2010) Use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for invasive lobular cancer: good, better, but maybe not the best? Ann Surg Oncol 17:255–262CrossRefPubMed

28.

Gruber I, Rueckert M, Kagan K et al (2013) Measurement of tumour size with mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance imaging as compared to histological tumour size in primary breast cancer. BMC Cancer 13:328CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Hsu P-K, Huang H-C, Hsieh C-C et al (2007) Effect of formalin fixation on tumor size determination in stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 84:1825–1829CrossRefPubMed

30.

Chen CH, Hsu MY, Jiang RS, Wu SH, Chen FJ, Liu SA (2012) Shrinkage of head and neck cancer specimens after formalin fixation. J Chin Med Assoc 75:109–113CrossRefPubMed

31.

Krekel NMA, van Slooten HJ, Barbe E, de Lange de Klerk ESM, Meijer S, van den Tol MP (2012) Is breast specimen shrinkage really a problem in breast-conserving surgery? J Clin Pathol 65:224–227CrossRefPubMed

32.

Zaidi M, Khan S, Farooqi NB, Abbas K, Idrees R (2014) Effect of formalin fixation on surgical margins in breast cancer surgical specimen. Int J Breast Cancer 2014:1–5CrossRef

33.

Yeap BH, Muniandy S, Lee S-K, Sabaratnam S, Singh M (2007) Specimen shrinkage and its influence on margin assessment in breast cancer. Asian J Surg 30:183–187CrossRefPubMed

34.

Tot T (2010) The origins of early breast carcinoma. Semin Diagn Pathol 27:62–68CrossRefPubMed

35.

Tot T, Gere M, Pekár G et al (2011) Breast cancer multifocality, disease extent, and survival. Hum Pathol 42:1761–1769CrossRefPubMed

36.

Tot T (2010) Cost-benefit analysis of using large-format histology sections in routine diagnostic breast care. Breast 19:284–288CrossRefPubMed

37.

Mennella S, Garlaschi A, Paparo F et al (2014) Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer: factors affecting the accuracy of preoperative lesion sizing. Acta Radiol 56:260–268CrossRefPubMed

38.

Schouten van der Velden AP, Boetes C, Bult P, Wobbes T (2006) The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and size assessment of in situ and small invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Surg 192:172–178CrossRefPubMed

39.

Thomassin-Naggara I, Siles P, Trop I et al (2013) How to measure breast cancer tumoral size at MR imaging? Eur J Radiol 82:e790–e800CrossRefPubMed

40.

Heller SL, Moy L (2012) Imaging features and management of high-risk lesions on contrast-enhanced dynamic breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:249–255CrossRefPubMed

41.

Mann RM, Bult P, van Laarhoven HWM et al (2013) Breast cancer size estimation with MRI in BRCA mutation carriers and other high risk patients. Eur J Radiol 82:1416–1422CrossRefPubMed

42.

Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E et al (2004) Preoperative breast MRI in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14:1209–1216CrossRefPubMed

43.

Levrini G, Mori CA, Vacondio R, Borasi G, Nicoli F (2008) MRI patterns of invasive lobular cancer: T1 and T2 features. Radiol Med 113:1110–1125CrossRefPubMed

44.

Kreienberg R, Albert U, Follmann M, Kopp I, Kühn T, Wöckel A (2012) Interdisziplinäre S3-Leitlinie für die Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms

45.

Stoutjesdijk MJ, Fütterer JJ, Boetes C, van Die LE, Jager G, Barentsz JO (2005) Variability in the description of morphologic and contrast enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. Investig Radiol 40:355–362CrossRef

46.

Rominger MB, Fournell D, Nadar BT et al (2009) Accuracy of MRI volume measurements of breast lesions: comparison between automated, semiautomated and manual assessment. Eur Radiol 19:1097–1107CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Which factors influence MRI-pathology concordance of tumour size measurements in breast cancer?
verfasst von: M. Rominger
D. Berg
T. Frauenfelder
A. Ramaswamy
N. Timmesfeld
Publikationsdatum: 14.08.2015
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology / Ausgabe 5/2016
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3935-5

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

23.04.2024 | Pankreaskarzinom | Nachrichten

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Which factors influence MRI-pathology concordance of tumour size measurements in breast cancer?

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Update Radiologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2016

Clinical feasibility of a myocardial signal intensity threshold-based semi-automated cardiac magnetic resonance segmentation method

Prognosis of spontaneous cervical artery dissection and transcranial Doppler findings associated with clinical outcomes

Asbestosis and other pulmonary fibrosis in asbestos-exposed workers: high-resolution CT features with pathological correlations

7 Tesla quantitative hip MRI: T1, T2 and T2* mapping of hip cartilage in healthy volunteers

Differentiation of early gastric cancer with ulceration and resectable advanced gastric cancer using multiphasic dynamic multidetector CT

Prostate diffusion-weighted imaging at 3T: effect of intravenous gadobutrol administration

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Update Radiologie