Detailed Information

Limitations of Conventional Contrast-enhanced MRI in Selecting Sentinel Node Biopsy Candidates among DCIS Patients

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorMoon, Hyeong-Gon-
dc.contributor.authorHan, Wonshik-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Jong Won-
dc.contributor.authorKo, Eunyoung-
dc.contributor.authorYu, Jong-Han-
dc.contributor.authorLyou, Chae Yeon-
dc.contributor.authorHwang, Ki-Tae-
dc.contributor.authorNoh, Dong-Young-
dc.contributor.authorMoon, Woo Kyung-
dc.contributor.authorJung, So-Youn-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Eun-Kyu-
dc.identifier.citationJOURNAL OF BREAST CANCER; Vol.13(2); 154-159ko_KR
dc.description.abstractPurpose: A better predictive model for occult invasive disease in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients is essential to guide the tailored use of sentinel node biopsies. We hypothesized that recent improvement of contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could provide more accurate information on the presence of occult invasion in DCIS patients. Methods: From a prospectively maintained database, we identified 143 DCIS patients diagnosed with needle biopsies in whom MRI images were available. Results: Sixty-five patients (45.5%) were upstaged to invasive carcinoma after curative surgery. Ultrasonographic lesion size, mass-appearance on mammography, type of needle used, and the presence of suspicious microinvasive foci were associated with increased likelihood of upstaging. Among the features of MRI, only mass-appearance was significantly associated with the presence of invasive disease (p=0.002). However, up to 50% of masses in MRI cases had mass-appearance on mammography as well. Other morphologic and pharmacokinetic features of MRI, such as shape, margin, and patterns of enhancement and washout, did not have a significant association. Conclusion: Among various morphologic and pharmacokinetic parameters of contrast-enhanced MRI, only mass-appearance was associated with occult invasive disease. Our results show the limitations of current contrast-enhanced MRI in predicting invasive disease in patients with preoperative diagnoses of DCIS.ko_KR
dc.subjectBreast neoplasmsko_KR
dc.subjectMagnetic resonance imagingko_KR
dc.subjectSentinel lymph node biopsyko_KR
dc.subjectNoninfiltrating intraductal carcinomako_KR
dc.titleLimitations of Conventional Contrast-enhanced MRI in Selecting Sentinel Node Biopsy Candidates among DCIS Patientsko_KR
dc.citation.journaltitleJOURNAL OF BREAST CANCER-
dc.description.citedreferenceMoon HG, 2009, ANN ONCOL, V20, P636, DOI 10.1093/annonc/mdn683-
dc.description.citedreferenceKuerer HM, 2009, J CLIN ONCOL, V27, P279, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.3103-
dc.description.citedreferenceHU M, 2009, P NATL ACAD SCI USA, V106, P3372-
dc.description.citedreferenceGadre SA, 2008, HISTOPATHOLOGY, V53, P545, DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2008.03152.x-
dc.description.citedreferenceOkumura Y, 2008, BMC CANCER, V8, DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-8-287-
dc.description.citedreferenceSakorafas GH, 2008, CANCER TREAT REV, V34, P483, DOI 10.1016/j.ctrv.2008.03.001-
dc.description.citedreferenceMorrow M, 2008, ANN SURG ONCOL, V15, P2641, DOI 10.1245/s10434-008-0083-z-
dc.description.citedreferencePorembka MR, 2008, ANN SURG ONCOL, V15, P2709, DOI 10.1245/s10434-008-9947-5-
dc.description.citedreferenceLee JW, 2008, J SURG ONCOL, V98, P15, DOI 10.1002/jso.21077-
dc.description.citedreferenceHu M, 2008, CANCER CELL, V13, P394, DOI 10.1016/j.ccr.2008.03.007-
dc.description.citedreferenceAnsari B, 2008, BRIT J SURG, V95, P547, DOI 10.1002/bjs.6162-
dc.description.citedreferenceOrel S, 2008, J CLIN ONCOL, V26, P703, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.3594-
dc.description.citedreferenceFacius M, 2007, CLIN IMAG, V31, P394, DOI 10.1016/j.clinimag.2007.04.030-
dc.description.citedreferenceKuhl CK, 2007, LANCET, V370, P485-
dc.description.citedreferenceJung EJ, 2007, INT J CANCER, V120, P2331, DOI 10.1002/ijc.22434-
dc.description.citedreferenceNielsen BS, 2007, INT J CANCER, V120, P2086, DOI 10.1002/ijc.22340-
dc.description.citedreferencevan der Velden APS, 2006, AM J SURG, V192, P172, DOI 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.02.026-
dc.description.citedreferenceGoyal A, 2006, BREAST CANCER RES TR, V98, P311, DOI 10.1007/s10549-006-9167-2-
dc.description.citedreferenceMansel RE, 2006, J NATL CANCER I, V98, P599, DOI 10.1093/jnci/djj158-
dc.description.citedreferenceLyman GH, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23, P7703, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2005.08.001-
dc.description.citedreferenceWilkie C, 2005, AM J SURG, V190, P563, DOI 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.06.011-
dc.description.citedreferenceGroves AM, 2005, MAGN RESON IMAGING, V23, P733, DOI 10.1016/j.mri.2005.06.003-
dc.description.citedreferenceHylton N, 2005, J CLIN ONCOL, V23, P1678, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2005.12.002-
dc.description.citedreferenceLeonard GD, 2004, J NATL CANCER I, V96, P906, DOI 10.1093/jnci/djh164-
dc.description.citedreferenceHata T, 2004, J AM COLL SURGEONS, V198, P190, DOI 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.10.008-
dc.description.citedreferenceHwang EW, 2003, ANN SURG ONCOL, V10, P381, DOI 10.1245/ASO.2003.03.085-
dc.description.citedreference*AM COLL RAD, 2003, ACR BI RADS BREAST I-
dc.description.citedreferenceMorrow M, 2002, CA-CANCER J CLIN, V52, P277-
dc.description.citedreferenceJackman RJ, 2001, RADIOLOGY, V218, P497-
dc.description.citedreferenceBrown LF, 1999, CLIN CANCER RES, V5, P1041-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:


Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.