Comparison of the Imaging Features of Lobular Carcinoma In Situ and Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast

Purpose@#To investigate the usefulness of imaging features for differentiating between small lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). @*Materials and Methods@#It included 52 female with LCISs (median 45 years, range 32–67 years) and 180 female with ILCs (median 49 years, range 36–75 years), with the longest diameter of ≤ 2 cm, who were evaluated between January 2012 and December 2016. All the female underwent mammography and ultrasonography. Twenty female with LCIS and 150 female with ILC underwent MRI. The clinical and imaging features were compared, and multivariate analysis was performed to identify the independent predictors of LCIS. Female with LCIS were also subgrouped by lesion size and compared with the female with ILC. @*Results@#Multivariate analysis showed that younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.100), smaller lesion size (OR = 1.103), oval or round shape (OR = 4.098), parallel orientation (OR = 5.464), and isoechotexture (OR = 3.360) were significant independent factors predictive of LCIS. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for distinguishing LCIS from ILC was 0.904 (95% confidence interval, 0.857–0.951). Subgroup analysis showed that benign features were more prevalent in female with smaller LCISs (≤ 1 cm) than in those with ILC. @*Conclusion@#Small LCISs tend to demonstrate more benign features than small ILCs. Several imaging features are independently predictive of LCIS.

Comparison of the Imaging Features of Lobular Carcinoma In Situ and Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast

Purpose@#To investigate the usefulness of imaging features for differentiating between small lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). @*Materials and Methods@#It included 52 female with LCISs (median 45 years, range 32–67 years) and 180 female with ILCs (median 49 years, range 36–75 years), with the longest diameter of ≤ 2 cm, who were evaluated between January 2012 and December 2016. All the female underwent mammography and ultrasonography. Twenty female with LCIS and 150 female with ILC underwent MRI. The clinical and imaging features were compared, and multivariate analysis was performed to identify the independent predictors of LCIS. Female with LCIS were also subgrouped by lesion size and compared with the female with ILC. @*Results@#Multivariate analysis showed that younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.100), smaller lesion size (OR = 1.103), oval or round shape (OR = 4.098), parallel orientation (OR = 5.464), and isoechotexture (OR = 3.360) were significant independent factors predictive of LCIS. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for distinguishing LCIS from ILC was 0.904 (95% confidence interval, 0.857–0.951). Subgroup analysis showed that benign features were more prevalent in female with smaller LCISs (≤ 1 cm) than in those with ILC. @*Conclusion@#Small LCISs tend to demonstrate more benign features than small ILCs. Several imaging features are independently predictive of LCIS.

Sonographic features that can be used to differentiate between small triple-negative breast cancer and fibroadenoma

PURPOSE: Our study investigated whether any sonographic findings could be useful for differentiating between small triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and fibroadenoma. METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by our Institutional Review Board, which waived the requirement for patient consent. From January 2009 to December 2010, the sonographic features of 181 pathologically proven TNBC tumors and 172 fibroadenomas measuring less than or equal to 2 cm in the longest dimension were reviewed and analyzed according to the fifth edition of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon. Mean tumor roundness was also measured using in-house software. RESULTS: The median longest lesion dimension was 16 mm (range, 13 to 18 mm) in TNBCs and 13 mm (range, 10 to 16 mm) in fibroadenomas. In comparison to fibroadenomas, small TNBC tumors presented with a higher incidence of irregular shapes (66.9%), noncircumscribed margins (91.7%), hypoechoic echotexture (59.1%), posterior acoustic enhancement (65.2%), and associated features (24.4%). Most TNBCs were classified as BI-RADS category 4 (65.2%) or 5 (28.2%). The mean tumor roundness of small TNBCs was greater than that of fibroadenomas (60%±12% vs. 53%±13%). Multivariate analysis showed that older patient age, irregular shape, nonparallel orientation, posterior acoustic enhancement, associated features, a BI-RADS final assessment category of 4 or 5, and greater tumor roundness were significant independent factors indicative of TNBCs. CONCLUSION: TNBC tumors tend to demonstrate more suspicious sonographic features and greater tumor roundness than fibroadenomas. These features may have the potential to help differentiate between small TNBCs and fibroadenomas.