Display options
Cite
Hamza A, Khawar S, Sakhi R, et al. Factors affecting the concordance of radiologic and pathologic tumor size in breast carcinoma. Ultrasound. 2018;27(1):45-54doi: 10.1177/1742271X18804278.
Hamza, A., Khawar, S., Sakhi, R., Alrajjal, A., Miller, S., Ibrar, W., Edens, J., Salehi, S., & Ockner, D. (2019). Factors affecting the concordance of radiologic and pathologic tumor size in breast carcinoma. Ultrasound (Leeds, England), 27(1), 45-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742271X18804278
Hamza, Ameer, et al. "Factors affecting the concordance of radiologic and pathologic tumor size in breast carcinoma." Ultrasound (Leeds, England) vol. 27,1 (2019): 45-54. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1742271X18804278
Hamza A, Khawar S, Sakhi R, Alrajjal A, Miller S, Ibrar W, Edens J, Salehi S, Ockner D. Factors affecting the concordance of radiologic and pathologic tumor size in breast carcinoma. Ultrasound. 2019 Feb;27(1):45-54. doi: 10.1177/1742271X18804278. Epub 2018 Oct 23. PMID: 30774698; PMCID: PMC6362536.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Ultrasound. 2019 Feb;27(1):45-54. doi: 10.1177/1742271X18804278. Epub 2018 Oct 23.

Factors affecting the concordance of radiologic and pathologic tumor size in breast carcinoma.

Ultrasound (Leeds, England)

Ameer Hamza, Sidrah Khawar, Ramen Sakhi, Ahmed Alrajjal, Shelby Miller, Warda Ibrar, Jacob Edens, Sajad Salehi, Daniel Ockner

Affiliations

  1. St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI, USA.

PMID: 30774698 PMCID: PMC6362536 DOI: 10.1177/1742271X18804278

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Radiologic assessment of tumor size is an integral part of the work-up for breast carcinoma. With improved radiologic equipment, surgical decision relies profoundly upon radiologic/clinical stage. We wanted to see the concordance between radiologic and pathologic tumor size to infer how accurate radiologic/clinical staging is.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The surgical pathology and ultrasonography reports of patients with breast carcinoma were reviewed. Data were collected for 406 cases. Concordance was defined as a size difference within ±2 mm.

RESULTS: The difference between radiologic and pathologic tumor size was within ±2 mm in 40.4% cases. The mean radiologic size was 1.73 ± 1.06 cm. The mean pathologic size was 1.84 ± 1.24 cm. A paired

CONCLUSION: Mean pathologic tumor size was significantly different from mean radiologic tumor size. Concordance was in just over 40% of cases and the stage classification was the same in about 60% of cases only. Therefore, surgical decision of lumpectomy versus mastectomy based on radiologic tumor size may not always be accurate.

Keywords: Breast carcinoma; breast ultrasound; concordance; pathologic staging; tumor size

References

  1. Acta Radiol. 1999 Mar;40(2):169-75 - PubMed
  2. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2000 Mar;60(1):43-55 - PubMed
  3. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001 Jun;13(6):868-75 - PubMed
  4. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001 Jul;8(6):549-59 - PubMed
  5. Am J Surg. 2001 Oct;182(4):351-4 - PubMed
  6. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000 May;113(5 Suppl 1):S19-29 - PubMed
  7. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Nov;179(5):1193-9 - PubMed
  8. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1993 May 1;3(3):185-90 - PubMed
  9. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003 Nov;181(5):1275-82 - PubMed
  10. Eur J Radiol. 2003 Dec;48(3):285-92 - PubMed
  11. Eur Radiol. 2004 Aug;14(8):1371-9 - PubMed
  12. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2004 Jun;85(3):211-8 - PubMed
  13. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004 Aug;11(8):756-61 - PubMed
  14. Eur J Radiol. 2005 Apr;54(1):55-61 - PubMed
  15. Eur Radiol. 2005 Jun;15(6):1224-33 - PubMed
  16. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2002 Jul 1;1(2):73-80 - PubMed
  17. Breast J. 2006 Mar-Apr;12(2):130-7 - PubMed
  18. J Surg Oncol. 2006 Sep 1;94(3):220-5 - PubMed
  19. J Surg Oncol. 2007 Nov 1;96(6):474-80 - PubMed
  20. Acta Oncol. 2007;46(7):996-1003 - PubMed
  21. Br J Cancer. 2008 Jan 29;98(2):289-93 - PubMed
  22. Ultrasound Q. 2008 Mar;24(1):31-8 - PubMed
  23. Radiology. 2009 Mar;250(3):638-47 - PubMed
  24. Am Surg. 2009 Oct;75(10):970-5 - PubMed
  25. Virchows Arch. 2011 Feb;458(2):125-31 - PubMed
  26. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2012 Jun;16(3):196-201 - PubMed
  27. Am Surg. 2012 Apr;78(4):440-6 - PubMed
  28. World J Surg Oncol. 2013 Jun 06;11:130 - PubMed
  29. Adv Anat Pathol. 2014 Nov;21(6):420-32 - PubMed
  30. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Nov;22(12):3816-23 - PubMed
  31. Clin Imaging. 2016 Nov - Dec;40(6):1269-1273 - PubMed
  32. Iran J Radiol. 2016 Jan 09;13(3):e28281 - PubMed
  33. Br J Cancer. 2017 Mar 28;116(7):893-902 - PubMed
  34. J Surg Oncol. 2017 Jun;115(8):924-931 - PubMed
  35. Acta Radiol. 2018 Jan;59(1):50-57 - PubMed
  36. Mymensingh Med J. 2017 Apr;26(2):223-229 - PubMed
  37. Eur Radiol. 2018 Jul;28(7):2986-2995 - PubMed
  38. Int J Surg Pathol. 2018 Aug;26(5):392-401 - PubMed
  39. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 May;25(5):1350-1356 - PubMed
  40. Acad Radiol. 2018 Nov;25(11):1457-1470 - PubMed
  41. Int J Surg Pathol. 2018 Sep;26(6):494-499 - PubMed
  42. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018 Jun;210(6):1376-1385 - PubMed
  43. Acta Radiol. 2019 Jan;60(1):35-44 - PubMed
  44. Cancer. 1987 Aug 15;60(4):765-71 - PubMed
  45. Radiology. 1995 Jun;195(3):617-21 - PubMed
  46. Radiology. 1996 Feb;198(2):333-40 - PubMed
  47. Radiology. 1996 Mar;198(3):665-9 - PubMed
  48. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1996;37(1):1-9 - PubMed
  49. J Ultrasound Med. 1997 Dec;16(12):791-7 - PubMed
  50. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999 Feb;172(2):313-7 - PubMed

Publication Types