American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 159, 287-294, Copyright © 1992 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Interval carcinomas in the Malmo Mammographic Screening Trial: radiographic appearance and prognostic considerations

DM Ikeda, I Andersson, C Wattsgard, L Janzon and F Linell
Department of Radiology, Malmo General Hospital, Sweden.

OBJECTIVE. Interval carcinoma is the term used to describe malignant breast tumors that are detected in the intervals between mammographic screenings. These tumors are important because they contribute significantly to breast cancer mortality in the screened population. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two radiologists retrospectively reviewed the mammograms of the 96 interval carcinomas (17% of all malignant neoplasms in the screened group) that were detected during the 10-year Malmo Mammographic Screening Trial in Malmo, Sweden (average time between screenings, 21 months), including one sarcoma, 75 invasive carcinomas, and 20 noninvasive carcinomas. We recorded the interval between screening and detection, and noted the tumor's appearance on the prior screening mammogram and at the time of diagnosis; these data were correlated with histologic tumor type and the patients' mortality. The doubling time for tumor volume of the invasive carcinomas was estimated. RESULTS. Excluding the sarcoma, 72 carcinomas (75%) were detected within 18 months of screening. Retrospective review of the available preceding screening mammograms (94 cases) indicated that 10 tumors were missed (observer's error), 63 studies showed no tumor (true interval carcinomas), and 21 studies showed subtle signs of malignancy, mostly nonspecific densities or asymmetries (unrecognized sign). Of 66 invasive carcinomas in which doubling times for tumor volume could be calculated, 27 (41%) had doubling times of less than 100 days. At the end of the study, 20 of the 96 patients had died of breast cancer. CONCLUSION. Interval carcinomas in this series were dominated by comedo, medullary, and mucinous carcinomas that often had a nonspecific appearance (when present) on prior screening mammograms. The interval carcinomas also contained a subset of rapidly growing tumors with a grave prognosis.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. G. Elmore and R. J. Brenner The More Eyes, the Better to See? From Double to Quadruple Reading of Screening Mammograms J Natl Cancer Inst, August 1, 2007; 99(15): 1141 - 1143. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. M. Chiarelli, V. A. Kirsh, N. S. Klar, R. Shumak, R. Jong, E. Fishell, M. J. Yaffe, and N. F. Boyd Influence of patterns of hormone replacement therapy use and mammographic density on breast cancer detection. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., October 1, 2006; 15(10): 1856 - 1862. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Collett, I. M. Stefansson, J. Eide, A. Braaten, H. Wang, G. E. Eide, S. O. Thoresen, W. D. Foulkes, and L. A. Akslen A Basal Epithelial Phenotype Is More Frequent in Interval Breast Cancers Compared with Screen Detected Tumors Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2005; 14(5): 1108 - 1112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. G. Elmore, K. Armstrong, C. D. Lehman, and S. W. Fletcher Screening for Breast Cancer JAMA, March 9, 2005; 293(10): 1245 - 1256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Joensuu, T. Lehtimaki, K. Holli, L. Elomaa, T. Turpeenniemi-Hujanen, V. Kataja, A. Anttila, M. Lundin, J. Isola, and J. Lundin Risk for Distant Recurrence of Breast Cancer Detected by Mammography Screening or Other Methods JAMA, September 1, 2004; 292(9): 1064 - 1073. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. V. Destounis, P. DiNitto, W. Logan-Young, E. Bonaccio, M. L. Zuley, and K. M. Willison Can Computer-aided Detection with Double Reading of Screening Mammograms Help Decrease the False-Negative Rate? Initial Experience Radiology, August 1, 2004; 232(2): 578 - 584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M. Ikeda, R. L. Birdwell, K. F. O'Shaughnessy, E. A. Sickles, and R. J. Brenner 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, March 1, 2004; 230(3): 811 - 819. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. F. Brem, J. Baum, M. Lechner, S. Kaplan, S. Souders, L. G. Naul, and J. Hoffmeister Improvement in Sensitivity of Screening Mammography with Computer-Aided Detection: A Multiinstitutional Trial Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2003; 181(3): 687 - 693. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. S. Majid, E. S. de Paredes, R. D. Doherty, N. R. Sharma, and X. Salvador Missed Breast Carcinoma: Pitfalls and Pearls RadioGraphics, July 1, 2003; 23(4): 881 - 895. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M. Ikeda, R. L. Birdwell, K. F. O'Shaughnessy, R. J. Brenner, and E. A. Sickles Analysis of 172 Subtle Findings on Prior Normal Mammograms in Women with Breast Cancer Detected at Follow-up Screening Radiology, February 1, 2003; 226(2): 494 - 503. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. M. Kolb, J. Lichy, and J. H. Newhouse Comparison of the Performance of Screening Mammography, Physical Examination, and Breast US and Evaluation of Factors that Influence Them: An Analysis of 27,825 Patient Evaluations Radiology, October 1, 2002; 225(1): 165 - 175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. H. Taplin, C. M. Rutter, C. Finder, M. T. Mandelson, F. Houn, and E. White Screening Mammography: Clinical Image Quality and the Risk of Interval Breast Cancer Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2002; 178(4): 797 - 803. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Esserman, H. Cowley, C. Eberle, A. Kirkpatrick, S. Chang, K. Berbaum, and A. Gale Improving the Accuracy of Mammography: Volume and Outcome Relationships J Natl Cancer Inst, March 6, 2002; 94(5): 369 - 375. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M Brown, C Eccles, and M G Wallis Geographical distribution of breast cancers on the mammogram: an interval cancer database Br. J. Radiol., April 1, 2001; 74(880): 317 - 322. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. L. Birdwell, D. M. Ikeda, K. F. O’Shaughnessy, and E. A. Sickles Mammographic Characteristics of 115 Missed Cancers Later Detected with Screening Mammography and the Potential Utility of Computer-aided Detection Radiology, April 1, 2001; 219(1): 192 - 202. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				R. J. Brenner, L. W. Bassett, L. L. Fajardo, D. D. Dershaw, W. P. Evans III, R. Hunt, C. Lee, I. Tocino, P. Fisher, M. McCombs, et al. Stereotactic Core-Needle Breast Biopsy: A Multi-institutional Prospective Trial Radiology, March 1, 2001; 218(3): 866 - 872. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				M. T. Mandelson, N. Oestreicher, P. L. Porter, D. White, C. A. Finder, S. H. Taplin, and E. White Breast Density as a Predictor of Mammographic Detection: Comparison of Interval- and Screen-Detected Cancers J Natl Cancer Inst, July 5, 2000; 92(13): 1081 - 1087. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. D. Gilliland, N. Joste, P. M. Stauber, W. C. Hunt, R. Rosenberg, G. Redlich, and C. R. Key Biologic Characteristics of Interval and Screen-Detected Breast Cancers J Natl Cancer Inst, May 3, 2000; 92(9): 743 - 749. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. J. Warren Burhenne, S. A. Wood, C. J. D'Orsi, S. A. Feig, D. B. Kopans, K. F. O'Shaughnessy, E. A. Sickles, L. Tabar, C. J. Vyborny, and R. A. Castellino Potential Contribution of Computer-aided Detection to the Sensitivity of Screening Mammography Radiology, May 1, 2000; 215(2): 554 - 562. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				P. L. Porter, A. Y. El-Bastawissi, M. T. Mandelson, M. G. Lin, N. Khalid, E. A. Watney, L. Cousens, D. White, S. Taplin, and E. White Breast Tumor Characteristics as Predictors of Mammographic Detection: Comparison of Interval- and Screen-Detected Cancers J Natl Cancer Inst, December 1, 1999; 91(23): 2020 - 2028. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Crosier, D. Scott, R. G. Wilson, C. D. M. Griffiths, F. E. B. May, and B. R. Westley Differences in Ki67 and c-erbB2 Expression between Screen-detected and True Interval Breast Cancers Clin. Cancer Res., October 1, 1999; 5(10): 2682 - 2688. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]