AJR ARRS: Your Link to CME
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cornford, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Evans, A. J.
Right arrow Articles by Cornford, E.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
DOI:10.2214/AJR.05.0725
AJR 2006; 187:1377-1380
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Original Research

Is Mammographic Spiculation an Independent, Good Prognostic Factor in Screening-Detected Invasive Breast Cancer?

Andrew J. Evans1, Sarah E. Pinder2, Jonathan J. James1, Ian O. Ellis2 and Eleanor Cornford1

1 Breast Institute, Nottingham International Breast Education Center and Nottingham City Hospital, Hucknall Rd., Nottingham NG5 1PB, United Kingdom.
2 Department of Histopathology, Nottingham City Hospital, Nottingham, United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE. The aim of this study was to review the prognostic significance of pathologic and radiologic factors for screening-detected invasive breast cancers of any size.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The patient group was a consecutive series of 470 screening-detected invasive breast cancers that were diagnosed between 1988 and 1998. Data regarding tumor type, grade, maximum invasive diameter, lymph node status, and the presence or absence of vascular invasion were recorded, as were the mammographic features of the lesion. Survival was ascertained from hospital records and a cancer registry. Differences in survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves with a log-rank test for difference. The significance of any correlations was assessed using the chi-square test and the chi-square test for trend. Multivariate analysis used a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS. At univariate analysis, large invasive size, the presence of definite vascular invasion, high histologic grade, and nodal involvement were associated with poorer breast-cancer-specific survival. Mammographic spiculation (the presence of either a spiculated mass or distortion) was associated with more prolonged breast-cancer-specific survival. The presence or absence of mammographic comedo calcification did not influence breast-cancer-specific survival. In a Cox multivariate analysis that included those factors significant in univariate analysis, size, grade, nodal stage, and mammographic spiculation maintained their prognostic significance.

CONCLUSION. Mammographic spiculation is an independent, good prognostic factor for screening-detected invasive breast cancer. The mechanism of how mammographic spiculation confers a beneficial prognostic effect is not clear.

Keywords: breast cancer • breast imaging • mammography • oncology • screening • spiculation


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
A. A. Luck, A. J. Evans, J. J. James, E. A. Rakha, E. C. Paish, A. R. Green, and I. O. Ellis
Breast Carcinoma with Basal Phenotype: Mammographic Findings
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): 346 - 351.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.