Predictive detection areas for identifying additional MRI-detected breast lesions on second-look ultrasonography.

PURPOSE: Identifying an additional MRI-detected breast lesion on second-look ultrasonography (US) is technically challenging because of lesion displacement with the patient's position change. The aim of this study is to help identify MRI-detected lesions on second-look US by developing a probing area, called "the predictive detection area" (PDA), and by assessing the PDA. METHODS: We measured the nipple-to-lesion distances (NLDs) for 16 breast lesions on prone- and supine-position MRI sets and calculated the difference and angle between the two NLD vectors, representing the lesion displacement. The minimum and maximum differences and angles were chosen to form the PDA. Another 22 breast lesions, detected in the prone MRI, were identified on US by probing the PDA to evaluate the probability of existence. RESULTS: The width between the minimum and maximum differences in two NLDs and the angle to form the PDA for the upper-inner, upper-outer, and lower-outer quadrants were 23.0 mm and 95.0°, 29.0 mm and 41.0°, and 18.0 mm and 17.0°, respectively. The respective probabilities of existence were 100, 80, and 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The PDA had a high probability of existence and was acceptably accurate; therefore, the PDA in a second-look US has the potential to help operators to quickly identify additional MRI-detected lesions.

Immunohistochemical analyses of CD44 variant isoforms in invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: comparison with a concurrent conventional invasive carcinoma of no special type component.

BACKGROUND: Invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) is a distinct histopathological variant of breast carcinoma and frequently develops lymph node metastases. CD44 is a family of transmembrane glycoprotein receptors with multiple variant isoforms (CD44v), which have tissue-specific expression. Previous studies have demonstrated a loss or gain of CD44v and CD44 standard form (CD44s) expression in breast carcinomas. In this study, we analyzed the immunoprofiles of CD44s, CD44v6, and CD44v9 in IMPC and compared them with those in a concurrent invasive carcinoma of no special type (ICNST) component, thus clarifying the significance of CD44 expression in IMPC. METHODS: Twenty-one consecutive cases of mixed IMPC were included in this study. The expression statuses of CD44s, CD44v6, and CD44v9 in both the IMPC and ICNST components were analyzed semiquantitatively by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: The immunohistochemical scores of CD44s, CD44v6, and CD44v9 were significantly decreased in the IMPC component compared to the ICNST component (p = 0.00335 for CD44s, p = 0.000982 for CD44v6, and p = 0.00271 for CD44v9). Moreover, the immunohistochemical scores of CD44v6 in the IMPC component and CD44v9 in the ICNST component of lymph node metastasis cases were significantly lower compared to cases without lymph node metastasis (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Decreased CD44 expression may play an important role in promoting lymph node metastasis in IMPC through an inability or decreased capacity to bind with the surrounding stroma. Moreover, high CD44s+ expression levels in the concurrent ICNST component may be related to the development of IMPC.

Which patients require or can skip biopsy for breast clustered microcysts? Predictive findings of breast cancer and mucocele-like tumor.

BACKGROUND: In order to determine the patients who require biopsy for breast clustered microcysts, we retrospectively investigated cases of clustered microcysts that were detected by ultrasonography (US) examinations. METHODS: We investigated 52 patients in whom clustered microcysts were detected by US and who underwent biopsy at our institution between January 2011 and March 2014. These patients were divided into two groups according to histopathological findings: those with invasive carcinoma (IC), ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), or mucocele-like tumor (MLT) (Group 1), and those with benign lesions (Group 2). Mammography (MG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings were assessed in these two groups. RESULTS: There were 12 patients in Group 1 (IC:2, DCIS:6, and MLT:4) and 40 patients in Group 2. In 51 of the 52 patients, MG was performed before biopsy. Since 11 of 12 patients in Group 1 exhibited MG findings (mass, focal asymmetry, coarse heterogeneous calcifications and fine pleomorphic calcifications) at the same site as the clustered microcysts, and that MG findings had a significant probability of detecting clustered microcysts categorized into Group 1 with a sensitivity of 91.7 % and negative predictive value (NPV) of 96.8 % (p < 0.001). In contrast, MRI was performed in 39 of the 52 patients, and only 3 of the 9 Group 1 patients (33.3 %) for whom MRI was performed were detected as MRI Category 4 or 5 enhancement. CONCLUSION: The patients who exhibit clustered microcysts with MG findings (mass, focal asymmetry, coarse heterogeneous calcifications and fine pleomorphic calcifications) appear to require biopsy.