What is the most common mammographic appearance of T1a and T1b invasive breast cancer?

Radiology and Oncology

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 173-180

  Podkrajšek, Maja ^a   Žgajnar, Janez ^a   Hočevar, Marko ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Asymmetric density; Breast cancer; Casting; Mammographic appearance; Microcalcifications; Stellate

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CLINICAL FEATURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY;

EID: 58149156109     PISSN: 13182099     EISSN: 15813207     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2478/v10019-008-0018-0     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Primic Zakelj M. Cancer incidence in Slovenia 2005. Ljubljana: Institute of Oncology Ljubljana. Cancer Registry of Slovenia; 2008.
2. Fletcher SW, Elmore JG. Clinical practice. Mammographic screening for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 1672-80.
3. Leitch AM, Dodd GD, Costanza M, Linver M, Pressman P, McGinnis L, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of breast cancer: update 1997. CA Cancer J Clin 1997; 47: 150-3.
4. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, Prevost TC, Duffy SW. Update of the Swedish Two-County Trial of breast cancer screening: histologic grade-specific and age-specific results. Swiss Surg 1999; 5: 199-204.
5. Barth RJ, Jr., Gibson GR, Carney PA, Mott LA, Becher RD, Poplack SP. Detection of breast cancer on screening mammography allows patients to be treated with less-toxic therapy. Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 324-9.
6. Tabar L, Tony Chen HH, Amy Yen MF, Tot T, Tung TH, Chen LS, et al. Mammographic tumor features can predict long-term outcomes reliably in women with 1-14-mm invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 101: 1745-59.
7. Rissanen TJ, Makarainen HP, Mattila SI, Karttunen AI, Kiviniemi HO, Kallioinen MJ, et al. Wire localized biopsy of breast lesions: a review of 425 cases found in screening or clinical mammography. Clin Radiol 1993; 47: 14-22.
8. Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E. Applications and literature review of the BI-RADS classification. Eur Radiol 2005; 15: 1027-36.
9. Kocijancic I, Rener M, Vidmar K. Simultaneous occurence of fat necrosis and carcinoma after breast injury in a traffic accident. Eur J Ultrasound 2000; 11: 213-6.
10. Burrell HC, Pinder SE, Wilson AR, Evans AJ, Yeoman LJ, Elston CW, et al. The positive predictive value of mammographic signs: a review of 425 non-palpable breast lesions. Clin Radiol 1996; 51: 277-81.
11. Franceschi D, Crowe JP, Lie S, Duchesneau R, Zollinger R, Shenk R, et al. Not all nonpalpable breast cancers are alike. Arch Surg 1991; 126: 967-70.
12. Sickles EA. Mammographic features of 300 consecutive nonpalpable breast cancers. Am J Roentgenol 1986; 146: 661-3.
13. Thurfjell MG, Lindgren A, Thurfjell E. Nonpalpable breast cancer: mammographic appearance as predictor of histologic type. Radiology 2002; 222: 165-70.
14. Tinnemans JG, Wobbes T, Holland R, Hendriks JH, Van der Sluis RF, Lubbers EJ, et al. Mammographic and histopathologic correlation of nonpalpable lesions of the breast and the reliability of frozen section diagnosis. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1987; 165: 523-9.
15. Samardar P, de Paredes ES, Grimes MM, Wilson JD. Focal asymmetric densities seen at mammography: US and pathologic correlation. Radiographics 2002; 22: 19-33.