Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4056
ISSN (Online): 1875-6603

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

Diagnostic Value of Ultrasound Elastography in the Differentiation of Breast Invasive Ductal Carcinoma and Ductal Carcinoma In situ

Author(s): Jian Shi, Luzeng Chen, Bin Wang, Hong Zhang, Ling Xu, Jingming Ye, Yinhua Liu, Yuhong Shao, Xiuming Sun and Yinghua Zou*

Volume 19, Issue 3, 2023

Published on: 26 August, 2022

Article ID: e210722206928 Pages: 6

DOI: 10.2174/1573405618666220721091940

Price: $65

Abstract

Background: Ultrasound elastography (US-E) has been shown superior to the conventional US in diagnosing benign and malignant breast lesions. In contrast, the role of US-E in the differentiation of breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has been poorly described.

Objective: This study was designed to examine the diagnostic value of US-E in the differentiation of IDC and DCIS.

Methods: Medical records of all patients who underwent preoperative US-E evaluation and were diagnosed with IDC or DCIS at our hospital from April-December 2019 were retrieved and analyzed. Those who had prior surgical treatment, chemotherapy or radiotherapy were excluded.

Results: Twenty women with DCIS and 111 women with IDC were included in this study. There were no significant differences in age, maximum lesion diameter and tumor volume between the two groups. While shear wave velocity (SWV) inside the lesion and in the surrounding tissue, strain ratio and tumor area ratio were not substantially different between the two groups, SWV at the edge of the lesion was significantly higher in IDC cases, which had an AUC value of 0.66 with a sensitivity of 65.8% and a specificity of 60.0% for the differential diagnosis of IDC and DCIS.

Conclusion: Edge SWV is significantly higher in IDC than that in DCIS, which had a moderate diagnostic value for the differentiation of IDC and DCIS, similar to the performance of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as reported in the literature. In terms of cost-effectiveness, US-E could be very useful while waiting for further evaluations to determine whether US-E combined with other diagnostic modalities improves the diagnostic performance.

Keywords: invasive ductal carcinoma, ductal carcinoma in situ, differential diagnosis, ultrasonic elastography, virtual touch tissue imaging quantification, shear wave velocity

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: Globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71(3): 209-49.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660] [PMID: 33538338]
[2]
Makki J. Diversity of breast carcinoma: Histological subtypes and clinical relevance. Clin Med Insights Pathol 2015; 8: CPath.S31563.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4137/CPath.S31563] [PMID: 26740749]
[3]
Balekouzou A, Yin P, Pamatika CM, et al. Epidemiology of breast cancer: Retrospective study in the Central African Republic. BMC Public Health 2016; 16(1): 1230.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3863-6] [PMID: 27923361]
[4]
Parikh U, Chhor CM, Mercado CL. Ductal carcinoma in situ: The whole truth. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018; 210(2): 246-55.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.18778] [PMID: 29045181]
[5]
Akram M, Iqbal M, Daniyal M, Khan AU. Awareness and current knowledge of breast cancer. Biol Res 2017; 50(1): 33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40659-017-0140-9] [PMID: 28969709]
[6]
Sharma GN, Dave R, Sanadya J, Sharma P, Sharma KK. Various types and management of breast cancer: An overview. J Adv Pharm Technol Res 2010; 1(2): 109-26.
[PMID: 22247839]
[7]
Collins LC, Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Schnitt SJ. Outcome of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ untreated after diagnostic biopsy. Cancer 2005; 103(9): 1778-84.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20979] [PMID: 15770688]
[8]
Sanders ME, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD, Page DL. The natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women treated by biopsy only revealed over 30 years of long-term follow-up. Cancer 2005; 103(12): 2481-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21069] [PMID: 15884091]
[9]
Liu Y, Shou K, Li J, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: Perspectives on tumor subtype and treatment. BioMed Res Int 2020; 2020: 1-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/7251431] [PMID: 32596362]
[10]
Viani GA, Stefano EJ, Afonso SL, et al. Breast-conserving surgery with or without radiotherapy in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Radiat Oncol 2007; 2(1): 28.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-2-28] [PMID: 17683529]
[11]
Solin LJ, Kurtz J, Fourquet A, et al. Fifteen-year results of breast-conserving surgery and definitive breast irradiation for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14(3): 754-63.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1996.14.3.754] [PMID: 8622021]
[12]
Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347(16): 1233-41.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022152] [PMID: 12393820]
[13]
van Dongen JA, Voogd AC, Fentiman IS, et al. Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy: European organization for research and treatment of Cancer 10801 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92(14): 1143-50.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/92.14.1143] [PMID: 10904087]
[14]
van Seijen M, Lips EH, Thompson AM, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: To treat or not to treat, that is the question. Br J Cancer 2019; 121(4): 285-92.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-019-0478-6] [PMID: 31285590]
[15]
Mori N, Mugikura S, Miyashita M, et al. Turbo spin-echo diffusion-weighted imaging compared with single-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging: Image quality and diagnostic performance when differentiating between ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma. Magn Reson Med Sci 2021; 20(1): 60-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp.2019-0195] [PMID: 32147641]
[16]
Ozturk A, Grajo JR, Dhyani M, Anthony BW, Samir AE. Principles of ultrasound elastography. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018; 43(4): 773-85.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1475-6] [PMID: 29487968]
[17]
Gennisson JL, Deffieux T, Fink M, Tanter M. Ultrasound elastography: Principles and techniques. Diagn Interv Imaging 2013; 94(5): 487-95.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2013.01.022] [PMID: 23619292]
[18]
Barr RG. The role of sonoelastography in breast lesions. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2018; 39(1): 98-105.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2017.05.010] [PMID: 29317043]
[19]
Chang JM, Moon WK, Cho N, et al. Clinical application of shear wave elastography (SWE) in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 129(1): 89-97.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1627-7] [PMID: 21681447]
[20]
Çebi Olgun D, Korkmazer B. Kılıç F, et al. Use of shear wave elastography to differentiate benign and malignant breast lesions. Diagn Interv Radiol 2014; 20(3): 239-44.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/dir.2014.13306] [PMID: 24509183]
[21]
Xue Y, Yao S, Li X, Zhang H. Value of shear wave elastography in discriminating malignant and benign breast lesions. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017; 96(42)e7412
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000007412] [PMID: 29049174]
[22]
Stoian D, Timar B, Craina M, Bernad E, Petre I, Craciunescu M. Qualitative strain elastography – strain ratio evaluation - an important tool in breast cancer diagnostic. Med Ultrason 2016; 18(2): 195-200.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.11152/mu.2013.2066.182.bcd] [PMID: 27239654]
[23]
Stachs A, Pandjaitan A, Martin A, et al. Accuracy of tumor sizing in breast cancer: A comparison of strain elastography, 3-D ultrasound and conventional B-mode ultrasound with and without compound imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol 2016; 42(12): 2758-65.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.06.026] [PMID: 27600473]
[24]
Li Q, Wang L, Wu H, et al. Controlled study of traditional ultrasound and ultrasound elastography on the diagnosis of breast masses. Ultrasound Q 2015; 31(4): 250-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000195] [PMID: 26656989]
[25]
Tsai WC, Lin CKJ, Wei HK, et al. Sonographic elastography improves the sensitivity and specificity of axilla sampling in breast cancer: A prospective study. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013; 39(6): 941-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2012.12.013] [PMID: 23465139]
[26]
Parajuly SS, Lan PY, Yan L, Gang YZ, Lin L. Breast elastography: A hospital-based preliminary study in China. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2010; 11(3): 809-14.
[PMID: 21039059]
[27]
Zhi H, Ou B, Luo BM, Feng X, Wen YL, Yang HY. Comparison of ultrasound elastography, mammography, and sonography in the diagnosis of solid breast lesions. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26(6): 807-15.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.7863/jum.2007.26.6.807] [PMID: 17526612]
[28]
Shin YJ, Kim SM, Yun BL, Jang M, Kim B, Lee SH. Predictors of invasive breast cancer in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ in ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy. J Ultrasound Med 2019; 38(2): 481-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jum.14722] [PMID: 30069893]
[29]
Berg WA, Mendelson EB, Cosgrove DO, et al. Quantitative maximum shear-wave stiffness of breast masses as a predictor of histopathologic severity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205(2): 448-55.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13448] [PMID: 26204299]
[30]
Crnogorac M, Ivanac G. Tomasović-Lončarić Č, Žic R, Kelava T, Brkljačić B. Sonoelastographic features of high-risk breast lesions and ductal carcinoma in situ-a pilot study. Acta Clin Croat 2019; 58(1): 13-22.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.20471/acc.2019.58.01.02] [PMID: 31363320]
[31]
Mendelson EB, Bohm-Velez M, Berg WA, et al. ACR Birads® ultrasound. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston: American College of Radiology 2013.
[32]
Sood R, Rositch AF, Shakoor D, et al. Ultrasound for breast cancer detection globally: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Glob Oncol 2019; 5(5): 1-17.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JGO.19.00127] [PMID: 31454282]
[33]
Guo R, Lu G, Qin B, Fei B. Ultrasound imaging technologies for breast cancer detection and management: A review. Ultrasound Med Biol 2018; 44(1): 37-70.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2017.09.012] [PMID: 29107353]
[34]
Mandrekar JN. Receiver operating characteristic curve in diagnostic test assessment. J Thorac Oncol 2010; 5(9): 1315-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ec173d] [PMID: 20736804]
[35]
Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Iwabuchi K, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of malignant breast tumors: The usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and ADC map for the detection of malignant breast tumors and evaluation of cancer extension. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005; 29(5): 644-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.rct.0000171913.74086.1b] [PMID: 16163035]
[36]
Mori N, Ota H, Mugikura S, et al. Detection of invasive components in cases of breast ductal carcinoma in situ on biopsy by using apparent diffusion coefficient MR parameters. Eur Radiol 2013; 23(10): 2705-12.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2902-2] [PMID: 23732688]
[37]
Choi SY, Chang Y-W, Park HJ, Kim HJ, Hong SS, Seo DY. Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficiency values on diffusion-weighted imaging with prognostic factors for breast cancer. Br J Radiol 2012; 85(1016): e474-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr/79381464] [PMID: 22128125]
[38]
Yoshikawa MI, Ohsumi S, Sugata S, et al. Comparison of breast cancer detection by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and mammography. Radiat Med 2007; 25(5): 218-23.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11604-007-0128-4] [PMID: 17581710]

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
9
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy