2019, Number 03
<< Back Next >>
Ginecol Obstet Mex 2019; 87 (03)
Relationship between radiological findings and immunophenotyped in breast cancer
Salazar-Segovia J, González-Balboa P, Montoya-Mendoza N, Sánchez- García LM, Hinojosa-Rodríguez KA, López-Rioja MJ, López-Recio Y
Language: Spanish
References: 14
Page: 177-185
PDF size: 218.46 Kb.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Establish if there is a relationship between the radiological findings and
the immunophenotype of breast cancer.
Materials and Methods: An observational, cross-sectional, retrospective study
realized at the ABC Medical Center, over a period of 4 years, that included patients
diagnosed with breast cancer performed by percutaneous or excisional biopsy, with
an immunohistochemical study and images (mammography and/or ultrasound). The
relationship between the morphological characteristics of the lesions observed in the
radiological studies and the immunophenotyped was studied by means of the c2 test.
Results: We included 182 patients, among the characteristics of the lesions we found
a significant relationship between the masses of irregular morphology with spiculate
edges and the calcifications grouped with luminal tumors; calcifications of amorphous
morphology with luminal A and pleomorphic fine tumors with luminal B .
Conclusion: The results suggest that there is a relationship between the morphological
findings b y imaging and the immunophenotype of mammary tumors.
REFERENCES
INEGI, estadísticas de mortalidad 2017. Dirección URL: .
Cárdenas J, et al. Consenso Mexicano sobre diagnóstico y tratamiento del cáncer mamario. GAMO 2015;14:2-55. http://www.gamo-smeo.com/temp/CANCER%20DE%20 MAMA.pdf
Ferlay J, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 2015;136:359-386. http://doi.org/10.1002/ ijc.29210.
Youlden D, et al. The descriptive epidemiology of female breast cancer: An international comparison of screening, incidence, survival and mortality. Cancer Epidemiol 2012;36:237-248. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. canep.2012.02.007.
Öztürk M, et al. Background parenchymal enhancement and fibroglandular tissue proportion on breast MRI: Correlation with hormone receptor expression and molecular subtypes of breast cancer. J Breast Health 2017;13:27-33. http://doi.org/10.5152/tjbh.2016.3247.
Mingxiang W, et al. association between imaging characteristics and different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Acad Radiol 2017;24:426-434. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. acra.2016.11.012.
Tabár L, et al. Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. Radiology 2011;260:658-663. http://doi. org/10.1148/radiol.11110469.
Cen D, et al. BI-RADS 3-5 microcalcications can preoperatively predict breast cancer HER2 and Luminal a molecular subtype. Oncotarget 2017;8:13855-13862. http://doi. org/10.18632/oncotarget.14655.
Cho N. Molecular subtypes and imaging phenotypes of breast cancer. Ultrasonography 2016;35:281-288. http:// doi.org/10.14366/usg.16030.
Elias S, et al. Imaging Features of HER2 Overexpression in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014;23:1464-1483. http://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-13-1170.
Bullier B, et al. Imaging features of sporadic breast cancer in women under 40 years old: 97 cases. Eur Radiol 2013;23:37-45. http://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013- 2966-z.
Sohn Y, et al. Immunohistochemical Subtypes of Breast Cancer: Correlation with Clinicopathological and Radiological Factors. Iran J Radiol 2016;13:1-9. http://doi.org/10.5812/ iranjradiol.31386.
Bauer KR, et al. Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2-negative invasive breast cancer, the so called Triple Negative Phenotype A Population Based Study From the California Cancer Registry. Cancer 2007;109:1721-1728. http://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.22618.
Du H, et al. Ultrasonographic findings of triple-negative breast cancer. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015;8:40-43.
Full text