Breast Ultrasonographic and Histopathological Characteristics Without Any Mammographic Abnormalities

Abstract

Objective: We evaluated ultrasonographic findings and the corresponding histopathological characteristics of breast cancer patients with Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 1 mammogram. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the ultrasonographic findings and the corresponding histopathological features of 45 breast cancer patients with BI-RADS category 1 mammogram and 537 controls with mammographic abnormalities. We evaluated the ultrasonographic findings including mass shape, periphery, internal and posterior echo pattern, interruption of mammary borders and the distribution of low-echoic lesions, and the corresponding histopathological characteristics including histological classification, hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status of invasive ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ, histological grade, mitotic counts and lymphovascular invasion in individual cases of BI-RADS category 1 mammograms and compared with those of the control group. Results: The ultrasonographic characteristics of the BI-RADS category 1 group were characterized by a higher ratio of round shape (P , 0.001), non-spiculated periphery (P ¼ 0.021), non-interruption of mammary borders (P , 0.001) and non-attenuation (P ¼ 0.011) compared with the control group. A total of 52.6% of low-echoic lesions were associated with spotted distribution in the BI-RADS 1 group, whereas 25.8% of low-echoic lesions were associated with spotted distribution in the control group (P ¼ 0.012). As for histopathological characteristics, there was a statistically higher ratio of triple-negative subtype (P ¼ 0.021), and this particular tendency was detected in histological grade 3 in the BI-RADS category 1 group (P ¼ 0.094). Conclusion: We evaluated ultrasonographic findings and the corresponding histopathological characteristics for BI-RADS category 1 mammograms and noted significant differences among these findings in this study. Evaluation of these ultrasonographic and histopathological characteristics may provide a more accurate ultrasonographic screening system for breast cancer in Japanese women.

Correlation of SASH1 expression and ultrasonographic features in breast cancer

“…As for the posterior acoustic attenuation revealed in ultrasound testing, most scholars believe it is caused by enhanced absorption of sound energy owing to increase and disorganized arrangement of tumor interstitial collagen fiber 15. In this study, we did not observe a difference in positive rate of SASH1 expression existing between patients with appearance of posterior acoustic attenuation or without; moreover, no correlation was found between posterior acoustic attenuation and SASH1 expression.…”

Early Diagnosis of Breast Cancer – In Respect to Expectations of Participants in Screening Programs and to Contemporary Research in Imaging Methods

“…It is becoming increasingly apparent that its sensitivity is superior in the normal collective, but especially in the clientele with dense breasts. The sensitivity of ultrasound in recent comparative publications is about 20% higher than that of mammography, can be up to 40% in defined collectives [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”

Technologist-performed Handheld Screening Breast US Imaging: How Is It Performed and What Are the Outcomes to Date?

“…Complex cystic and solid masses include intracystic masses, cystic masses with thick (0.5 mm) wall and/or thick (0.5 mm) septations, and predominantly solid masses with cystic components, are suspicious and merit biopsy (60,69). Importantly, cancers detected with supplemental US have been reported more likely than cancers first seen by using mammography to be oval or round, circumscribed, lack an echogenic rim and other effects on surrounding tissue, and to show no posterior features or enhancement (68,70). This emphasizes the importance of careful technique and documentation to avoid misclassification.…”