Digital volumetric measurement of mammographic density and the risk of overlooking cancer in Japanese women.

BACKGROUND: Breast density often affects cancer detection via mammography (MMG). Because of this, additional tests are recommended for women with dense breasts. This study aimed to reveal trends in breast density among Japanese women and determine whether differences in breast density differentially affected the detection of abnormalities via MMG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 397 control women who underwent MMG screening as well as 269 patients who underwent surgery for breast cancer for whom preoperative MMG data were available. VolparaDensity™ (Volpara), a three-dimensional image analysis software with high reproducibility, was used to calculate breast density. Breasts were categorized according to the volumetric density grade (VDG), a measure of the percentage of dense tissue. The associations between age, VDG, and MMG density categories were analyzed. RESULTS: In the control group, 78% of women had dense breasts, while in the breast cancer group, 87% of patients had dense breasts. One of 36 patients with non-dense breasts (2.7%) was classified as category 1 or 2 (C-1 or C-2), indicating that abnormal findings could not be detected by MMG. The proportion of patients with breast cancer who had dense breasts and were classified as C-1 or C-2 was as high as 22.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The proportions of Japanese women with dense breasts were high. In addition, the false-negative rate for women with dense breasts was also high. Owing to this, Japanese women with dense breasts may need to commonly undergo additional tests to ensure detection of breast cancer in the screening MMG.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer patients with previous breast augmentation surgery.

The number of breast augmentation surgeries (BAS) has increased. Therefore, the number of breast cancer patients with history of BAS has also increased. In this paper, we present two cases of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with previous BAS who were diagnosed with breast cancer. The patients were augmented using different approach; the first case was augmented through transaxillary incision, whereas the second case was augmented through periareolar incision. Lymphoscintigraphy (LPG) was performed on the patients 1 day prior to operation, enabling confirmation of lymphatic flow and SLN in both patients. SLNB was successfully performed in both cases. In one patient, SLNB was performed using indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence and the Photodynamic Eye (PDE) system. Regardless of history of BAS, ICG and PDE system showed lymphatic flow and SLN in real time. LPG and ICG fluorescence were useful methods for SLN detection in patients with previous BAS, being able to confirm lymph flow before operation. Biopsy methods using LPG and PDE system were considered useful for difficult confirmation of lymph flow after breast augmentation. This is the first report of SLNB using ICG and PDE system for patients with previous BAS.

Evaluation of sentinel node biopsy by combined fluorescent and dye method and lymph flow for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Conservative breast resection with subsequent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) is an increasingly popular initial approach for the treatment of breast cancer due to decreased invasiveness. SNB is a shorter procedure with fewer side effects than more substantial surgical procedures, but it sometimes fails to identify metastatic disease. Therefore, a highly sensitive and convenient method is needed to identify sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) with a high probability of containing disease in SNB. We compared the combination of radioisotope or dye with a fluorescence compound to analyze lymph flow to identify targets for SNB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined patients with breast cancer lacking metastases in the axillary lymph node (ALN). Two methods for targeted SNB were developed: (1) Indocyanine Green (ICG) and Patent blue were injected into the skin overlying the tumor and sub-areolar region just before the surgical procedure. (2) ICG and radiocolloid were injected into the skin overlying the tumor and sub-areolar region. The draining fluorescent lymphatic duct was visualized using a Photodynamic Eye (PDE). We removed the SLNs that were identified by the dye and fluorescence imaging methods. Method 1 was applied to 113 patients undergoing SNB, and 29 patients were treated with Method 2. In our study, patients were grouped by lymph flow into two types: Type C demonstrated convergence to one lymph duct. Type S demonstrated separate lymph ducts. RESULTS: Using the fluorescence imaging method, 99.3% of SLNs were identified, and 3.8 SLNs per patient were seen. The SLN identification rates for Patent blue dye and radiocolloid were 92.9% and 100%, respectively, while 1.9 and 2.0 SLNs per patient, respectively, were seen with these methods. We classified two types of lymph flow based on the pattern of lymphatic drainage. Type C converged to a single lymph duct, while Type S drained to separate ducts. Type S lymph drainage was seen in 29/142 patients (20.4%), and Type C drainage was found in 113/141 patients (79.6%). Of the patients with Type S drainage, there were 4.1 SLNs per patient, but only 3.4 SLNs per patient were seen in individuals with Type C drainage. Forty cases had metastases found in the ALNs, and five of these cases were dye-negative and fluorescence-positive. Among these cases, the average number of SLNs identified was one. CONCLUSION: The combination of fluorescence with a visible dye is a highly sensitive method for SLN identification. When SNB is guided by only the dye method, there is a risk of missing appropriate SLNs in patients with Type S lymph drainage or weak dye staining. The use of a fluorescence method together with dye could increase sensitivity of detection in these cases. Furthermore, fluorescent methods are ideal for hospitals that cannot use conventional radioactive measures.

Analysis of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after breast-conserving treatment based on the classification of true recurrences and new primary tumors.

BACKGROUND: Ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences (IBTR) after breast-conserving treatment include two different entities: true recurrence (TR) thought to occur when residual cancer cells grow gradually to detectable size and new primary (NP) thought to be de novo cancer independently arising in the preserved breast. The patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) are potentially at high risk for subsequent distant metastasis, but many studies do not distinguish between these types of recurrence. The aim of this study is to clarify the biological difference between TR and NP, and to show the clinical significance of classifying IBTR into these two types of recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 172 patients with IBTR after breast-conserving therapy from the cohort of a long-term large scale study (Research of cancer treatment from the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan (no.13-9)) were analyzed. We classified IBTRs as TR or NP based on tumor location and pathological findings. The characteristics of the primary tumors of TR and NP were compared. Survival rates and risk factors of each type of IBTR were examined by the Kaplan-Meier method. The results of salvage surgery were also analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 172 patients, 135 patients were classified as TR and 26 as NP. Eleven cases could not be categorized. The primary tumor of TR was characterized by a high rate of lymph node metastasis (37.8%) and short disease-free interval (mean DFI; 46.6 months) while that of NP showed a rather low lymph node positivity (8.7%) and longer DFI (62.1 months). The risk factors for TR were young age, positive surgical margin, omission of irradiation and positive lymph node metastasis. Those for NP were young age, omission of irradiation and contralateral breast cancer after the primary operation. The 5-year survival rates after IBTR were 71.0% in TR and 94.7% in NP (p=0.022). Salvage operation was performed in 136 IBTRs. Eighty-one patients underwent salvage mastectomy and 55 patients underwent repeat lumpectomy. Five-year survival rates after salvage operation were 75.7% for mastectomy and 84.2% for lumpectomy (N.S.). Twenty percent of patients who underwent repeat lumpectomy developed secondary local relapse within 5 years after salvage treatment. The risk factors for secondary local relapse were analyzed. Limited to cases of IBTR which received radiation therapy after the primary operation, NP was the only factor influencing secondary local relapse by univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: TR and NP show clinically quite different features; time to occurrence, characteristics of the original tumor, prognosis and risk factor profile for IBTR were all different. Classifying IBTR as TR or NP can provide clinically significant data for the management of IBTR.