AJR Not a Member? Click to Join ARRS!
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Evans, A.
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Evans, A.
Right arrow Articles by Ellis, I.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 162, 1307-1311, Copyright © 1994 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: correlation between mammographic and pathologic findings

A Evans, S Pinder, R Wilson, M Sibbering, D Poller, C Elston and I Ellis
Department of Radiology, Nottingham City Hospital, United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE. Ductal carcinoma in situ shows heterogeneous clinical behavior and response to treatment depending on its pathologic features. The aim of this study was to correlate the radiologic and pathologic features of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Differences, if present, may allow refinement of diagnosis and selection of treatment options. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The mammograms of 128 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast were analyzed by a radiologist who knew that the patients had ductal carcinoma in situ but had no other pathologic information. The radiologic and pathologic features of subgroups characterized according to cell size and presence of necrosis were then compared. Statistical comparisons were made by using the chi 2- and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS. Patients with small-cell ductal carcinoma in situ more commonly have a normal mammogram (28% vs 6%, respectively, p < .001) or an abnormal mammogram without calcification (42% vs 5%, respectively, p < .001) than do patients with large-cell ductal carcinoma in situ. Among patients with abnormal mammographic findings, calcification is present in 58% of those with small-cell ductal carcinoma in situ, compared with 95% of those with large-cell ductal carcinoma in situ (p < .001). No significant differences were found in the calcification morphology of small- and large-cell ductal carcinoma in situ. These features were seen more commonly in ductal carcinoma in situ with necrosis than in ductal carcinoma in situ without necrosis, respectively: abnormal mammographic findings (95% vs 73%, p < .001), calcification (96% vs 61%, p < .001), calcification with a ductal distribution (80% vs 45%, p < .005), and rod-shaped calcification (83% vs 45%, p < .001). An abnormal mammogram without calcification (39% vs 4%, p < .001) or predominantly punctate calcification (36% vs 13%, p < .05) was seen more commonly in ductal carcinoma in situ without necrosis than in ductal carcinoma in situ with necrosis, respectively. CONCLUSION. We have shown that the radiologic features of ductal carcinoma in situ vary according to cell size and the presence of necrosis in particular. Necrosis has been found to be a feature of more biologically aggressive in situ breast cancer, so these findings may be of practical value in deciding the management of indeterminate calcification clusters and whether to offer breast conservation.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
H. J. Shin, H. H. Kim, S. M. Kim, G. Y. Kwon, G. Gong, and O. K. Cho
Screening-Detected and Symptomatic Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Differences in the Sonographic and Pathologic Features
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 516 - 525.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Pathol.Home page
G M Tse, P-H Tan, A L M Pang, A P Y Tang, and H S Cheung
Calcification in breast lesions: pathologists' perspective
J. Clin. Pathol., February 1, 2008; 61(2): 145 - 151.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
L. F. Stein, G. Zisman, J. A. Rapelyea, A. M. Schwartz, B. Abell, and R. F. Brem
Lobular Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast Presenting as a Mass
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2005; 184(6): 1799 - 1801.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
W. T. Yang and G. M. K. Tse
Sonographic, Mammographic, and Histopathologic Correlation of Symptomatic Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2004; 182(1): 101 - 110.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Jpn J Clin OncolHome page
M. Sato, T. Fukutomi, S. Akashi-Tanaka, K. Miyakawa, N. Yamamoto, and T. Hasegawa
Accuracy in Estimating Tumor Extension According to Mammographic Subtypes in Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2002; 32(5): 157 - 161.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
W. A. Berg, C. L. Arnoldus, E. Teferra, and M. Bhargavan
Biopsy of Amorphous Breast Calcifications: Pathologic Outcome and Yield at Stereotactic Biopsy
Radiology, November 1, 2001; 221(2): 495 - 503.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.