Correlating sonography, mammography, and pathology in the assessment of breast cancer size

Tina J Hieken, Jacqueline Harrison, Jose Herreros, Jose M. Velasco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

91 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: With the increasing use of neoadjuvant and minimally invasive therapy, the accuracy of preoperative determination of breast tumor size becomes important. Therefore, we undertook this study to compare mammography and ultrasonography (US). Methods: A total of 180 invasive breast cancer patients were prospectively examined by mammography and US; 146 eligible patients had tumors visualized by both modalities. Results: In 69% of cases, US was better than or equivalent to mammography in determining tumor size. Both underestimated tumor size; mean (median) underestimation was 3.8 ± 0.7 mm (1.7 mm) by US and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm (2 mm) by mammogram. Maximal tumor dimension was accurate within 5 mm in 65% of cases by mammography and 75% of cases by US. For mammographically determined size (versus pathologic size) correlation, r, was 0.4 and for US it was 0.63 and improved for only T1 and T2 tumors. Conclusions: These data suggest that US is more accurate than mammography in assessing breast cancer size.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)351-354
Number of pages4
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Volume182
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Mammography
Ultrasonography
Pathology
Breast Neoplasms
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Breast cancer
  • Breast ultrasonography
  • Tumor size

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Correlating sonography, mammography, and pathology in the assessment of breast cancer size. / Hieken, Tina J; Harrison, Jacqueline; Herreros, Jose; Velasco, Jose M.

In: American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 182, No. 4, 2001, p. 351-354.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hieken, Tina J ; Harrison, Jacqueline ; Herreros, Jose ; Velasco, Jose M. / Correlating sonography, mammography, and pathology in the assessment of breast cancer size. In: American Journal of Surgery. 2001 ; Vol. 182, No. 4. pp. 351-354.
@article{11283565849949eaba19631eca689c71,
title = "Correlating sonography, mammography, and pathology in the assessment of breast cancer size",
abstract = "Background: With the increasing use of neoadjuvant and minimally invasive therapy, the accuracy of preoperative determination of breast tumor size becomes important. Therefore, we undertook this study to compare mammography and ultrasonography (US). Methods: A total of 180 invasive breast cancer patients were prospectively examined by mammography and US; 146 eligible patients had tumors visualized by both modalities. Results: In 69{\%} of cases, US was better than or equivalent to mammography in determining tumor size. Both underestimated tumor size; mean (median) underestimation was 3.8 ± 0.7 mm (1.7 mm) by US and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm (2 mm) by mammogram. Maximal tumor dimension was accurate within 5 mm in 65{\%} of cases by mammography and 75{\%} of cases by US. For mammographically determined size (versus pathologic size) correlation, r, was 0.4 and for US it was 0.63 and improved for only T1 and T2 tumors. Conclusions: These data suggest that US is more accurate than mammography in assessing breast cancer size.",
keywords = "Breast cancer, Breast ultrasonography, Tumor size",
author = "Hieken, {Tina J} and Jacqueline Harrison and Jose Herreros and Velasco, {Jose M.}",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00726-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "182",
pages = "351--354",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Correlating sonography, mammography, and pathology in the assessment of breast cancer size

AU - Hieken, Tina J

AU - Harrison, Jacqueline

AU - Herreros, Jose

AU - Velasco, Jose M.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Background: With the increasing use of neoadjuvant and minimally invasive therapy, the accuracy of preoperative determination of breast tumor size becomes important. Therefore, we undertook this study to compare mammography and ultrasonography (US). Methods: A total of 180 invasive breast cancer patients were prospectively examined by mammography and US; 146 eligible patients had tumors visualized by both modalities. Results: In 69% of cases, US was better than or equivalent to mammography in determining tumor size. Both underestimated tumor size; mean (median) underestimation was 3.8 ± 0.7 mm (1.7 mm) by US and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm (2 mm) by mammogram. Maximal tumor dimension was accurate within 5 mm in 65% of cases by mammography and 75% of cases by US. For mammographically determined size (versus pathologic size) correlation, r, was 0.4 and for US it was 0.63 and improved for only T1 and T2 tumors. Conclusions: These data suggest that US is more accurate than mammography in assessing breast cancer size.

AB - Background: With the increasing use of neoadjuvant and minimally invasive therapy, the accuracy of preoperative determination of breast tumor size becomes important. Therefore, we undertook this study to compare mammography and ultrasonography (US). Methods: A total of 180 invasive breast cancer patients were prospectively examined by mammography and US; 146 eligible patients had tumors visualized by both modalities. Results: In 69% of cases, US was better than or equivalent to mammography in determining tumor size. Both underestimated tumor size; mean (median) underestimation was 3.8 ± 0.7 mm (1.7 mm) by US and 3.5 ± 0.9 mm (2 mm) by mammogram. Maximal tumor dimension was accurate within 5 mm in 65% of cases by mammography and 75% of cases by US. For mammographically determined size (versus pathologic size) correlation, r, was 0.4 and for US it was 0.63 and improved for only T1 and T2 tumors. Conclusions: These data suggest that US is more accurate than mammography in assessing breast cancer size.

KW - Breast cancer

KW - Breast ultrasonography

KW - Tumor size

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035174984&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035174984&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00726-7

DO - 10.1016/S0002-9610(01)00726-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 11720669

AN - SCOPUS:0035174984

VL - 182

SP - 351

EP - 354

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 4

ER -