Digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis for detecting invasive lobular and ductal carcinoma.
Breast cancer
Breast density
Mammography
Tomosynthesis
Journal
Breast cancer research and treatment
ISSN: 1573-7217
Titre abrégé: Breast Cancer Res Treat
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8111104
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
27
04
2023
accepted:
13
07
2023
medline:
11
10
2023
pubmed:
12
9
2023
entrez:
11
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is a distinct histological subtype of breast cancer that can make early detection with mammography challenging. We compared imaging performance of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) to digital mammography (DM) for diagnoses of ILC, invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), and invasive mixed carcinoma (IMC) in a screening population. We included screening exams (DM; n = 1,715,249 or DBT; n = 414,793) from 2011 to 2018 among 839,801 women in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Examinations were followed for one year to ascertain incident ILC, IDC, or IMC. We measured cancer detection rate (CDR) and interval invasive cancer rate/1000 screening examinations for each histological subtype and stratified by breast density and modality. We calculated relative risk (RR) for DM vs. DBT using log-binomial models to adjust for the propensity of receiving DBT vs. DM. Unadjusted CDR per 1000 mammograms of ILC overall was 0.33 (95%CI: 0.30-0.36) for DM; 0.45 (95%CI: 0.39-0.52) for DBT, and for women with dense breasts- 0.33 (95%CI: 0.29-0.37) for DM and 0.54 (95%CI: 0.43-0.66) for DBT. Similar results were noted for IDC and IMC. Adjusted models showed a significantly increased RR for cancer detection with DBT compared to DM among women with dense breasts for all three histologies (RR; 95%CI: ILC 1.53; 1.09-2.14, IDC 1.21; 1.02-1.44, IMC 1.76; 1.30-2.38), but no significant increase among women with non-dense breasts. DBT was associated with higher CDR for ILC, IDC, and IMC for women with dense breasts. Early detection of ILC with DBT may improve outcomes for this distinct clinical entity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37697031
doi: 10.1007/s10549-023-07051-6
pii: 10.1007/s10549-023-07051-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
505-514Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U54CA163303
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P01 CA154292
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P01CA154292
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R50CA211115
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01CA149365
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P01CA154292
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U54CA163303
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R01CA149365
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R50CA211115
Pays : United States
Organisme : Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
ID : PCS-1504-30370
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Mouabbi JA, Hassan A, Lim B et al (2022) Invasive lobular carcinoma: an understudied emergent subtype of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 193:253–264
doi: 10.1007/s10549-022-06572-w
pubmed: 35347549
Johnson K, Sarma D, Hwang ES (2015) Lobular breast cancer series: imaging. Breast Cancer Res 17:94
doi: 10.1186/s13058-015-0605-0
pubmed: 26163296
pmcid: 4499185
Porter AJ, Evans EB, Foxcroft LM et al (2013) Mammographic and ultrasound features of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. J Med Imag Rad Oncol 5(1):1–10
McCart Reed AE, Kalinowski L, Simpson PT et al (2021) Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: the increasing importance of this special subtype. Breast Cancer Res Treat 23:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-020-01384-6
doi: 10.1186/s13058-020-01384-6
Romanucci G, Zantedeschi L, Ventriglia A et al (2021) Lobular breast cancer conspicuity on digital breast tomosynthesis compared to synthesized 2D mammography: a multireader study. J Imag 7(9):185. https://doi.org/10.3390/jimaging7090185
doi: 10.3390/jimaging7090185
McDonald ES, Oustimov A, Weinstein SP et al (2016) Effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography: outcomes analysis from 3 years of breast cancer screening. JAMA Oncol 2(6):737–743. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.5536
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.5536
pubmed: 26893205
Alabousi M, Wadera A, Kashif Al-Ghita M et al (2021) Performance of digital breast tomosynthesis, synthetic f¢mammography, and digital mammography in breast cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Nat Cancer Institute 113(6):680–690
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djaa205
Lowry KP, Coley RY, Miglioretti DL et al (2021) Screening performance of digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography in community practice by patient age, screening round, and breast density. JAMA Netw Open 3(7):e2011792–e2011792
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.11792
Kerlikowske K, Su Y, Sprague BL et al (2022) Association of screening with digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography with risk of interval invasive and advanced breast cancer. JAMA 327(22):2220–2230. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.7672
doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.7672
pubmed: 35699706
pmcid: 9198754
Menezes GLG, van den Bosch MAAJ, Postma EL et al (2013) Invasive ductolobular carcinoma of the breast: spectrum of mammographic, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging findings correlated with proportion of the lobular component. Springerplus 2:621
doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-621
pubmed: 24340243
pmcid: 3858590
Chammings F, Kao E, Ladis A et al (2017) Imagine features and conspicuity of invasive lobular carcinomas on digital breast tomosynthesis. Br J Radiol 90:20170128
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20170128
pubmed: 28368663
Grubstein A, Rapson Y, Morgenstern S et al (2016) Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: appearance on digital breast tomosynthesis. Breast Care 11:359–362
doi: 10.1159/000450868
pubmed: 27920631
pmcid: 5122992
Mariscotti G, Durando M, Houssami N et al (2016) Digital breast tomosynthesis as an adjunct to digital mammography for detecting and characterising invasive lobular cancers: a multi-reader study. Clin Radiol 71(9):889–895
doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2016.04.004
pubmed: 27210245
Yun SJ, Ryu CW, Rhee SJ et al (2017) Benefit of adding digital breast tomosynthesis to digital mammography for breast cancer screening focused on cancer characteristics: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 164:557–569
doi: 10.1007/s10549-017-4298-1
pubmed: 28516226
Fuji MH, Herschorn SD, Sowden M et al (2019) Detection rates for benign and malignant diagnoses on breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis in a statewide mammography registry study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 212(3):706
doi: 10.2214/AJR.18.20255
Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. About the BCSC :: BCSC (bcsc-research.org). Last Accessed: 7/31/2022.
Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Standard Definitions :: BCSC (bcsc-research.org). Last Accessed: 7/31/2022.
Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, et al. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res. 2004;6(3):R149–56. Da Ros L, Moretti A, Querzoli P, et al. HER2-positive lobular versus ductal carcinoma of the breast: pattern of first recurrence and molecular insights. Clin Breast Cancer. 2018;18(5):e1133–9.
Christgen M, Gluz O, Harbeck N et al (2020) Differential impact of prognostic parameters in hormone receptor-positive lobular breast cancer. Cancer 126(22):4847–4858
doi: 10.1002/cncr.33104
pubmed: 32780421
Flores-Diaz D, Arce C, Flores-Luna L et al (2019) Impact of invasive lobular carcinoma on long-term outcomes in Mexican breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 176(1):243–249
doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05234-8
pubmed: 30997623
Altundag K (2019) HER2+ and triple-negative phenotypes in invasive lobular carcinoma might have different specific biological features. Breast Cancer Res Treat 176(3):719
doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05277-x
pubmed: 31104173
Turner NC, Slamon DJ, Ro J et al (2018) Overall survival with palbociclib and fulvestrant in advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 379(20):1926–1936
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1810527
pubmed: 30345905
Palbociclib and Endocrine Therapy for LObular Breast Cancer Preoperative Study (PELOPS) United states: National library of Medicine; 2016 [Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0276454 . Accessed Oct 2020.
Assessing Efficacy of Carboplatin and ATezOlizumab in Metastatic Lobular Breast Cancer (GELATO) Netherlands2017 Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03147040 . Accessed Oct 2020.
ROS1 Targeting With Crizotinib in Advanced E-cadherin Negative, ER Positive Lobular Breast Cancer or Diffuse Gastric Cancer Study (ROLo) United Kingdom2019 [Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0362064 . Accessed Oct 2020.
Neoadjuvant Study of Targeting ROS1 in Combination With Endocrine Therapy in Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast (ROSALINE) [available from https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04551495 ]. Accessed Oct 2020.
Perez-Garcia J, Cortes J, Metzger-Filho O (2019) Efficacy of single-agent chemotherapy for patients with advanced invasive lobular carcinoma: a pooled analysis from three clinical trials. Oncologist 24(8):1041–1047
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0182
pubmed: 30578311
Ruhstaller T, Giobbie-Hurder A, Colleoni M et al (2019) Adjuvant letrozole and tamoxifen alone or sequentially for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer: long-term follow-up of the BIG 1–98 trial. J Clin Oncol 37(2):105–114
doi: 10.1200/JCO.18.00440
pubmed: 30475668
Metzger-Filho O, Ferreira AR, Jeselsohn R et al (2019) Mixed invasive ductal and lobular carcinoma of the breast: prognosis and the importance of histologic grade. Oncologist 24(7):e441–e449. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0363
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0363
pubmed: 30518616
Hogan MP, Amir T, Sevilimedu V et al (2021) AJR Am J Roentgenol 216(6):1486–1491. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.20.23480
doi: 10.2214/AJR.20.23480
pubmed: 33787291
pmcid: 9219005