RESUMO
Five hundred and thirty seven women at risk for breast carcinoma were identified. Family history was detailed and each woman given genetic counselling. Diagnostic examination for breast carcinoma was performed at the major hospitals of Norway, and included physical examination by expert surgeon, mammography and/or ultrasonography, and fine needle aspiration cytology when appropriate. Altogether 8 carcinomas and 5 cases of atypical hyperplasia were found, compared with 1.6 and 0.3 expected, respectively, from population studies. The finding exceeded the expected numbers described by autosomal dominant inheritance. In addition we found one carcinoma in situ. It is concluded that the methods employed are suitable to identify and examine women at risk for breast carcinoma. It is suggested that atypical hyperplasia may be the precancerous lesion, and should be treated as such.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Biópsia por Agulha , Mama/citologia , Mama/patologia , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Carcinoma in Situ/genética , Carcinoma in Situ/patologia , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/genética , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/patologia , Suscetibilidade a Doenças , Família , Feminino , Humanos , Hiperplasia , Mamografia , Anamnese , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Noruega , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Ultrassonografia MamáriaRESUMO
During a six-year period, 17 patients younger than 20 years of age, with a final diagnosis of subacute osteomyelitis, were admitted to the Norwegian Radium Hospital because of an initial suspicion of primary malignant bone tumour. The most common localizations were the metaphyses of long bones (eight patients) and the clavicle (four patients). Pain was the dominating symptom. Common radiological findings were localized osteolysis and/or sclerosis, cortical bone destruction, periosteal reaction and an adjacent, often palpable soft tissue mass. Clinical signs of infection were generally absent, and a positive bacterial culture was obtained from the biopsy material in only one patient. Following extensive investigations, a malignant bone tumour (especially Ewing's sarcoma) remained a differential diagnosis, and open biopsy was indicated in all cases. The patient material illustrates the difficulty in distinguishing between subacute osteomyelitis and malignant bone tumours, and it is stressed that diagnostic investigations for this type of patients should be performed in an oncological centre with experience of bone tumours.
