DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Role of Breast Tomosynthesis in Diagnosis of Breast Cancer for Japanese Women

  • Takamoto, Yayoi (Division of Gene Regulation, Institute for Advanced Medical Research, School of Medicine, Keio University) ;
  • Tsunoda, Hiroko (Department of Radiology, St. Luke's International Hospital) ;
  • Kikuchi, Mari (Department of Radiology, St. Luke's International Hospital) ;
  • Hayashi, Naoki (Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, St. Luke's International Hospital) ;
  • Honda, Satoshi (Department of Radiology, St. Luke's International Hospital) ;
  • Koyama, Tomomi (Department of Radiology, St. Luke's International Hospital) ;
  • Ohde, Sachiko (St. Luke's Life Science Institute Center for Clinical Epidemiology) ;
  • Yagata, Hiroshi (Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, St. Luke's International Hospital) ;
  • Yoshida, Atsushi (Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, St. Luke's International Hospital) ;
  • Yamauchi, Hideko (Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, St. Luke's International Hospital)
  • Published : 2013.05.30

Abstract

Introduction: Mammography is the most basic modality in breast cancer imaging. However, the overlap of breast tissue depicted on conventional two-dimensional mammography (2DMMG) may create significant obstacles to detecting abnormalities, especially in dense or heterogeneously dense breasts. In three-dimensional digital breast tomosynthesis (3DBT), tomographic images of the breast are reconstructed from multiple projections acquired at different angles. It has reported that this technology allows the generation of 3D data, therefore overcoming the limitations of conventional 2DMMG for Western women. We assessed the detectability of lesions by conventional 2DMMG and 3DBT in diagnosis of breast cancer for Japanese women. Methods: The subjects were 195 breasts of 99 patients (median age of 48 years, range 34~82 years) that had been pathologically diagnosed with breast cancer from December 20, 2010 through March 31, 2011. Both conventional 2DMMG and 3DBT imaging were performed for all patients. Detectability of lesions was assessed based on differences in category class. Results: Of the affected breasts, 77 (75.5%) had lesions assigned to the same categories by 2DMMG and 3DBT. For 24 (23.5%) lesions, the category increased in 3DBT indicating improvement in diagnostic performance compared to 2DMMG. 3DBT improved diagnostic sensitivity for patients with mass, focal asymmetric density (FAD), and architectural distortion. However, 3DBT was not statistically superior in diagnosis of the presence or absence of calcification. Conclusions: In this study, 3DBT was superior in diagnosing lesions in form of mass, FAD, and/or architectural distortion. 3DBT is a novel technique that may provide a breakthrough in solving the difficulties of diagnosis caused by parenchyma overlap for Japanese women.

Keywords

Breast tomosynthesis;mammography;breast cancer;Japanese women

References

  1. Andersson I, Ikeda DM, Zackrisson S, et al (2008). Breast tomosynesis and digital mammography:a comparison of breas cancer visibility and BIRADS classification in a population of cancers with subtle mammographic findings. Eur Radiol, 18, 2817-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1076-9
  2. Alakhras M, Bourne R, Rickard M, et al (2013). Digital tomosynthesis: A new future for breast imaging? Clin Radiol, 68, 225-36 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2013.01.007
  3. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas B, et al (2003). Individual and combined effects of age,breast density,andhormone replacement theraphy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med, 138, 168-75. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-138-3-200302040-00008
  4. Gur D (2007). Tomosynthesis: potential clinical role in breast imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 189, 614-5. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2588
  5. Hakim CM, Chough DM, Ganott MA, et al (2010). Digital breast tomosynthesis in the diagnostic environment: a subjective side-by-side review. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 195, 172-6. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3244
  6. Helvie MA (2010). Digital mamography imaging: breast tomosynthesis and advanced applications. Radio Clin N Am, 48, 917-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2010.06.009
  7. Houssami N, Skaane P (2013). Overview of the evidence on digital breast tomosynthesis in breast cancer detection. Breast, 22, 101-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2013.01.017
  8. Humpherey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK ,et al (2003). Breast cancer screening:a summary of the evidence for the US. Preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med, 137, 347-60.
  9. Leconte I, Feger C, Galant C, et al (2003). Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers:the importance of radiologic breast dencity. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 180, 1675-9. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.180.6.1801675
  10. Michell MJ, Iqbal A, Wasan RK, et al (2012). A comparison of the accuracy of film-screen mammography, full-field digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis. Clin Radiol, 67, 976-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2012.03.009
  11. Park FM, Franken EA, Garg M, et al (2007). Breast tomosynthesis:present considerations and future applications. Radio Graphics, 27, 231-40.
  12. Poplack SP, Tosteson TD, Kogel CA, et al (2007). Digital breast tomosynthesis:initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digial screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 189, 616-23. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2231
  13. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, et al (2013). Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology, 267, 47-56. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12121373
  14. Spangler ML, Zuley ML, Sumkin JH, et al (2011). Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 196, 320-4. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4656
  15. Teertstra HJ, Loo CE, Bosch MAAJ, et al (2010). Breast tomosynthesis in clinical practice:initial results. Eur Radiol, 20, 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1523-2
  16. Vecchio S, Albanese A, Vignoli P, et al (2011) A novel approach to digital breast tomosynthesis for simultaneous acquisition of 2D and 3D images. Eur Radiol, 21, 1207-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-2041-y
  17. Williams MB, Judy PG, Gunn S, et al (2010) Dual-modality breast tomosynthesis. Radiology, 255, 191-8. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.09091160
  18. Zuley ML, Bandos AI, Ganott MA, et al (2013) Digital breast tomosynthesis versus supplemental diagnostic mammographic views for evaluation of noncalcified breast lesions. Radiology, 266, 89-95. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120552

Cited by

  1. Early diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in Japanese kidney transplant recipients: a single center experience vol.4, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0946-2
  2. Digital mammography versus digital breast tomosynthesis for detection of breast cancer in the intraoperative specimen during breast-conserving surgery vol.23, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-015-0628-5
  3. Improvement in diagnostic performance of breast cancer: comparison between conventional digital mammography alone and conventional mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis vol.25, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-018-0859-3