Clinical radiology · 2021
Breast ductal carcinoma in situ with micro-invasion versus ductal carcinoma in situ: a comparative analysis of clinicopathological and mammographic findings.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang M, Lin Q, Su X H, Cui C X, Bian T T, Wang C Q, Zhao J, Li L L, Ma J Z, Huang J L
Аннотация
AIM: To determine the differences in clinicopathological and mammographic findings between ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and ductal carcinoma in situ with micro-invasion (DCIS-MI) and explore clinicopathological and mammographic factors associated with DCIS-MI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All DCIS patients with or without micro-invasion who underwent preoperative mammography at The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2016 through June 2020 were identified retrospectively. The correlations of clinicopathological findings with DCIS-MI were evaluated using univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses. Imaging findings were compared between the groups by using the Pearson chi-square test.
RESULTS: A total of 445 DCIS lesions and 151 DCIS-MI lesions were included in the final analysis. Large extent (≥2.7 cm), high nuclear grade, comedo-type, negative progesterone receptor (PR), negative oestrogen receptor (ER), high Ki-67 and axillary lymph node metastasis were more frequently found in DCIS-MI than in DCIS (all p<0.05), and the first four of these were found to be independent predictors of DCIS-MI in the multivariate analysis (all p<0.05). Regarding imaging findings, compared to DCIS, DCIS-MI showed fewer occult lesions and more lesions with calcifications in mass, asymmetry, and architectural distortion (p=0.004). Grouped calcifications were usually associated with DCIS, while regional calcifications were commonly found in DCIS-MI (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Large extent, high nuclear grade, comedo-type and negative PR were found to be independent predictors of DCIS-MI. Lesions with calcifications and regional calcifications were more likely associated with DCIS-MI on mammography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All DCIS patients with or without micro-invasion who underwent preoperative mammography at The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from January 2016 through June 2020 were identified retrospectively. The correlations of clinicopathological findings with DCIS-MI were evaluated using univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses. Imaging findings were compared between the groups by using the Pearson chi-square test.
RESULTS: A total of 445 DCIS lesions and 151 DCIS-MI lesions were included in the final analysis. Large extent (≥2.7 cm), high nuclear grade, comedo-type, negative progesterone receptor (PR), negative oestrogen receptor (ER), high Ki-67 and axillary lymph node metastasis were more frequently found in DCIS-MI than in DCIS (all p<0.05), and the first four of these were found to be independent predictors of DCIS-MI in the multivariate analysis (all p<0.05). Regarding imaging findings, compared to DCIS, DCIS-MI showed fewer occult lesions and more lesions with calcifications in mass, asymmetry, and architectural distortion (p=0.004). Grouped calcifications were usually associated with DCIS, while regional calcifications were commonly found in DCIS-MI (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Large extent, high nuclear grade, comedo-type and negative PR were found to be independent predictors of DCIS-MI. Lesions with calcifications and regional calcifications were more likely associated with DCIS-MI on mammography.