Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
S. Wojcinski, A. Soliman, J. Schmidt, L. Makowski, F. Degenhardt, P. Hillemanns (2012)
Sonographic Features of Triple‐Negative and Non–Triple‐Negative Breast CancerJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 31
D. Ryu, Chung-Han Lee (2011)
Mammography and ultrasound features of triple-negative breast cancer
Su Lee, J. Chang, S. Shin, A. Chu, Ann Yi, N. Cho, Woo Moon (2017)
Imaging features of breast cancers on digital breast tomosynthesis according to molecular subtype: association with breast cancer detection.The British journal of radiology, 90 1080
R. Dent, M. Trudeau, K. Pritchard, W. Hanna, H. Kahn, C. Sawka, L. Lickley, E. Rawlinson, P. Sun, S. Narod (2007)
Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Clinical Features and Patterns of RecurrenceClinical Cancer Research, 13
M. Coombes, Emma Ph.D., Lorna Ph.D., Robert M.Phil., Ph.D Jassem, Thierry Ph.D., Stephen M.D., Isabel M.D., M. Bertelli, Olaf M.D., Alan Ph.D., Emilio M.D., David M.D., M. Coleman, Lesley M.D., D.Phil, M. Mickiewicz, D.M.Sc Andersen, Per Lønning, Giorgio Ph.D., Alan Ph.D., Nick M.D., M.Sc Snowdon, Ph.D Carpentieri, M. Massimini, M.Sc Bliss (1977)
THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINEThe Lancet, 309
Samuel Magny, Rachel Shikhman, Ana Keppke (2020)
Breast Imaging Reporting and Data SystemDefinitions
Y. Kojima, H. Tsunoda (2011)
Mammography and ultrasound features of triple-negative breast cancerBreast Cancer, 18
J. Elmore, G. Longton, P. Carney, B. Geller, T. Onega, A. Tosteson, H. Nelson, M. Pepe, K. Allison, S. Schnitt, F. O'Malley, D. Weaver (2015)
Diagnostic concordance among pathologists interpreting breast biopsy specimens.JAMA, 313 11
J. Parker, Michael Mullins, M. Cheang, S. Leung, D. Voduc, T. Vickery, S. Davies, C. Fauron, Xiaping He, Zhiyuan Hu, J. Quackenbush, I. Stijleman, J. Palazzo, J. Marron, A. Nobel, E. Mardis, T. Nielsen, M. Ellis, C. Perou, P. Bernard (2009)
Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 27 8
D. Slamon, G. Clark, S. Wong, W. Levin, A. Ullrich, W. McGuire (1987)
Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene.Science, 235 4785
Tong Wu, Jing Li, Dongmo Wang, X. Leng, Lei Zhang, Zi-yao Li, H. Jing, Jia Kang, J. Tian (2019)
Identification of a correlation between the sonographic appearance and molecular subtype of invasive breast cancer: A review of 311 cases.Clinical imaging, 53
author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law
S. Rashmi, S. Kamala, SSudha Murthy, S. Kotha, YSuhas Rao, KVeeraiah Chaudhary (2018)
Predicting the molecular subtype of breast cancer based on mammography and ultrasound findingsThe Indian Journal of Radiology & Imaging, 28
DJ Slamon (2001)
10.1056/NEJM200103153441101N Engl J Med, 344
F. Au, S. Ghai, F. Lu, H. Moshonov, P. Crystal (2017)
Histological Grade and Immunohistochemical Biomarkers of Breast Cancer: Correlation to Ultrasound FeaturesJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 36
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s)
M. Koo, C. Wagner, G. Abel, S. Mcphail, G. Rubin, G. Lyratzopoulos (2017)
Typical and atypical presenting symptoms of breast cancer and their associations with diagnostic intervals: Evidence from a national audit of cancer diagnosisCancer Epidemiology, 48
Wei-Tse Yang, M. Dryden, K. Broglio, M. Gilcrease, S. Dawood, P. Dempsey, V. Valero, G. Hortobagyi, D. Atchley, B. Arun (2008)
Mammographic features of triple receptor-negative primary breast cancers in young premenopausal womenBreast Cancer Research and Treatment, 111
Abid Irshad, Rebecca Leddy, E. Pisano, Nathaniel Baker, Madelene Lewis, S. Ackerman, Amy Campbell (2013)
Assessing the role of ultrasound in predicting the biological behavior of breast cancer.AJR. American journal of roentgenology, 200 2
E. Perez, E. Romond, V. Suman, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, G. Sledge, C. Geyer, S. Martino, P. Rastogi, J. Gralow, S. Swain, E. Winer, G. Colón-Otero, N. Davidson, E. Mamounas, J. Zujewski, N. Wolmark (2014)
Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: planned joint analysis of overall survival from NSABP B-31 and NCCTG N9831.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 32 33
B. Seo, E. Pisano, Cherie Kuzimak, M. Koomen, Dag Pavic, Yeonhee Lee, E. Cole, J. Lee (2006)
Correlation of HER-2/neu overexpression with mammography and age distribution in primary breast carcinomas.Academic radiology, 13 10
Fengyang Zheng, Qing Lu, Beijian Huang, Hansheng Xia, Li-xia Yan, Xi Wang, W. Yuan, Wenping Wang (2017)
Imaging features of automated breast volume scanner: Correlation with molecular subtypes of breast cancer.European journal of radiology, 86
B. Gao, H. Zhang, S.-D. Zhang, X-Y Cheng, S. Zheng, Y. Sun, D-W Zhang, Y. Jiang, Jingyang Tian (2014)
Mammographic and clinicopathological features of triple-negative breast cancer.The British journal of radiology, 87 1039
M. Boisserie-Lacroix, G. MacGrogan, M. Debled, S. Ferron, M. Asad-Syed, P. McKelvie-Sebileau, S. Mathoulin-Pélissier, V. Brouste, G. Hurtevent-Labrot (2013)
Triple-negative breast cancers: associations between imaging and pathological findings for triple-negative tumors compared with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative breast cancers.The oncologist, 18 7
Si-qing Cai, M. Yao, Donglu Cai, Jianxiang Yan, Meiling Huang, Lisheng Yan, Huirong Huang (2019)
Association between digital breast tomosynthesis and molecular subtypes of breast cancerOncology Letters, 17
F. Bray, J. Ferlay, I. Soerjomataram, R. Siegel, Lindsey Torre, A. Jemal (2018)
Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countriesCA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68
Mingxiang Wu, Jie Ma (2017)
Association Between Imaging Characteristics and Different Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer.Academic radiology, 24 4
Yu-Mee Sohn, Kyunghwa Han, M. Seo (2016)
Immunohistochemical Subtypes of Breast Cancer: Correlation with Clinicopathological and Radiological FactorsIranian Journal of Radiology, 13
N. Goldstein, D. Decker, D. Severson, Scott Schell, F. Vicini, J. Margolis, N. Dekhne (2007)
Molecular classification system identifies invasive breast carcinoma patients who are most likely and those who are least likely to achieve a complete pathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapyCancer, 110
Mi Kim, N. Choi (2013)
Mammographic and ultrasonographic features of triple-negative breast cancer: a comparison with other breast cancer subtypesActa Radiologica, 54
M. Jan, Javeed Mattoo, N. Salroo, Shahnawaz Ahangar (2010)
Triple assessment in the diagnosis of breast cancer in KashmirIndian Journal of Surgery, 72
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations
To compare features of clinically defined subtypes of breast cancer on mammography (MG) and ultrasonography (USG). After obtaining approval from the institute ethics committee, a retrospective observational study was performed on biopsy-proven breast cancer patients who underwent baseline MG from 2016 to 2020. MG and USG features were evaluated and the patients were classified based on immunohistochemistry profile into luminal like (LL)-oestrogen receptor (ER)/progesterone receptor (PR) + , Her2neu-; basal like (BL)-ER/PR-, Her2neu-; Her2 like (HL)-Her2neu + . A total of 479 patients (mean age, 51.4 ± 11.7 years; all females) were included: LL—198 (41.3%), BL—121 (25.2%) and HL—160 (33.3%). On MG, round shape (21/115, 18.3%, p < 0.001); circumscribed (16/115, 13.9%, p < 0.001) and microlobulated margins (28/115, 24.4%) were associated with BL tumours. Associated suspicious calcifications (96/160, 60%, p < 0.001) and skin thickening or retraction (75/149, 50.3%, p < 0.001) were more common in HL. On USG, round shape (12/95, 12.8%, p = 0.005); circumscribed (8/94, 8.5%) and microlobulated margins (44/94, 46.8%) and posterior acoustic enhancement (7/95, 7.5%, p = 0.012) were associated with BL. The logistic regression analysis revealed that spiculated margins on MG favoured LL (OR: 8.5, p = 0.001); round shape (OR: 6.8), circumscribed (OR: 10.8) or microlobulated margins (OR: 3.5) (p < 0.001 for each) favoured BL; whereas associated features of calcifications (OR: 3.3) (p = 0.019) and skin retraction or thickening (OR: 1.8) (p < 0.001) favoured HL. On USG, circumscribed (OR: 5.9, p = 0.005) or microlobulated margins (OR: 3, p < 0.001) and posterior acoustic enhancement (OR: 9.5, p = 0.006) favoured BL. Clinically defined subtypes of breast cancer show significant differences in the imaging appearances on mammography and USG. BL tumours may not show the typical imaging features of malignancy, necessitating clinicopathological correlation for accurate diagnosis.
Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology – Springer Journals
Published: Dec 1, 2022
Keywords: Breast cancer; Mammography; Ultrasonography; Triple negative breast cancer
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.