Tl-201 scintigraphy, mammography and ultrasonography in the evaluation of palpable and nonpalpable breast lesions: a correlative study

Quantitative (201)thallium scintigraphy for prediction of histological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in osteosarcoma; systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The histological assessment of tumor necrosis of the excised lesion after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is the most important prognostic factor for patients with osteosarcoma, but more early prognostic factors are needed for the adjustment of adjuvant treatment regimen. The objective of this systematic review is to provide an up-to-date and unprecedented summary of the value of (201)thallium ((201)Tl) scintigraphy for the preoperative evaluation of the chemotherapy response of osteosarcoma.

METHODS

Studies evaluating (201)Tl scintigraphy for the preoperative evaluation of the chemotherapy response of osteosarcoma were systematically searched for in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for each study were calculated into 2 × 2 contingency tables. The DerSimonian-Laird random-effects method was used for determining the pooled diagnostic odds ratio and the area under curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve.

RESULTS

A total of six studies with 139 patients who fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria were considered for the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.83-0.98) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.52-0.74), respectively. A significant difference was found between the good and poor responders in the diagnostic odds ratio. The SROC curve showed that the AUC was 0.840, indicating excellent diagnostic accuracy. There was no statistically significant heterogeneity among the six studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The alteration ratio derived from (201)Tl scintigraphy was useful for evaluating the histological response of patients to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in osteosarcoma.

New approaches in the management of male breast cancer

Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare condition that accounts for 0.1% of all male cancers. Our current evidence base for treatment is derived from female breast cancer (FBC) patients. Risk factors for MBC include age, genetic predisposition, race, sex hormone exposure, and environmental factors. Most patients present later and with more advanced disease than comparable FBC patients. Tumors are likely to be estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor positive, with the most common histologic type being invasive ductal carcinoma. Triple assessment remains the criterion standard for diagnosis. Primary MBC is mostly managed initially by simple mastectomy, with the option of breast conserving surgery, which carries an increased risk of recurrence. Sentinel node biopsy is recommended as the initial procedure for staging the axilla. Reconstructive surgery focuses on achieving primary skin closure, and radiotherapy largely follows treatment protocols validated in FBC. We recommend chemotherapy for men with more advanced disease, in particular, those with estrogen receptor negative histology. MBC responds well to endocrine therapy, although it is associated with significant adverse effects. Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are promising but raise concerns due to their failure to prevent estrogen synthesis in the testes. Fulvestrant remains unproven as a therapy, and data on trastuzumab is equivocal with HER2 receptor expression and functionality unclear in MBC. In metastatic disease, drug-based hormonal manipulation remains a first-line therapy, followed by systemic chemotherapy for hormone-refractory disease. Prognosis for MBC has improved over the past 30 years, with survival affected by disease staging, histologic classification, and comorbidity.

Male breast cancer

Male breast cancer (MBC) is a rare disease. However, as global populace ages, there is a trend to MBC increasing. Although aetiology is still unclear, constitutional, environmental, hormonal (abnormalities in estrogen/androgen balance) and genetic (positive family history, Klinefelter syndrome, mutations in BRCA1 and specially BRCA2) risk factors are already known. Clinic manifestation is painless hard and fixed nodule in the subareolar region in 75% of cases, with nipple commitment earlier than in women. Breast cancer has similar prognostic factors in males and females, among which axillary adenopathy (present in 40-55% cases) is the most important one. Although mammography, ultrasonography and scintigraphy can be useful tools in diagnosis; clinical assessment, along with a confirmatory biopsy, remains the main step in the evaluation of men with breast lesions. Infiltrating ductal carcinoma is the most frequent histological type. The established standard of care is modified radical mastectomy followed by tamoxifen for endocrine-responsive positive disease, although other options are being explored. While similarities between breast cancer in males and females exist, it is not appropriate to extrapolate data from female disease to the treatment of male. There is a need for specific multi-institutional trials to better understanding of clinicopathologic features and establishment of optimal therapy for this disease.

Male breast cancer: a review of clinical management

AIMS

Male breast cancer incidence is 1% of all breast cancers and is increasing. We aim to present an overview of male breast cancer with particular emphasis on clinical management.

METHODS

Studies were identified by an online search of literature in the MEDLINE database till June 2006 followed by an extensive review of bibliographies.

RESULTS

Increased risk factors include genetic predisposition as in BRCA2 families; testicular dysfunction due to chromosomal abnormality such as Klinefelter's syndrome or environmental factors such as chronic heat exposure and radiation. Clinical assessment with biopsy is the hallmark of diagnosis. Earlier presentations are becoming commoner but there are wide geographical differences. Surgical treatment involves simple or modified radical mastectomy along with surgical assessment of the axilla, either via sentinel node biopsy in clinically node-negative disease or axillary sampling/clearance in node-positive disease. Reconstructions for restoring body image have been recently reported. Indications for adjuvant therapies are similar to that in women. For metastatic disease, tamoxifen is still the mainstay for oestrogen receptor positive disease. For oestrogen receptor negative disease, doxorubicin based chemotherapy regimens are used. In addition, the oft neglected psychological aspects of men having a "cancer of women" are increasingly being recognised.

CONCLUSIONS

There is, thus, need for further increasing awareness among men to reduce stigma associated with presentation of symptoms related to breast. This should be in addition to stressing to clinicians the ways of earlier detection and tailor-made "gender oriented" treatment of breast cancer in men.

Male breast cancer--an andrological disease: risk factors and diagnosis

Gynaecomastia, the enlargement of the male breast, is considered as an andrological disease. To date, a review on male breast cancer (MBC) has not been published in an andrological journal. The papers underlying this review were published from authors of different institutions: Clinical Genetics, Dermatology, Gynaecology, Internal Medicine, Oncology, Pathology, Psychiatry, Radiology and Surgery. MBC accounts for approximately 1% of breast cancer patients. A total of 182 men died of breast cancer in 1999, in Germany. In the US, 1500 new cases per year occur. MBC accounts for <5% of surgically removed breast lumps. Diseases with increased oestrogen action increase the risk of MBC. Mutations of distinct genes are estimated to account for up to roughly 10% of MBC. BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations are responsible for approximately 80% of the families with hereditary breast cancer. The diagnosis of MBC is not possible without histological examination. Different diagnostic procedures such as clinical diagnosis, sonography, mammography, fine-needle biopsy and core needle facilitate the decision whether a biopsy is necessary.

Contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography in breast lesions: effect on differential diagnosis after mammography and gray scale sonography

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions after a mammography-gray scale sonography combination.

METHODS

Sixty-eight patients with 69 breast masses underwent power Doppler sonography before and after intravenous injection of a contrast agent. The lesions were diagnosed as "highly suggestive of malignancy" (category 5; n = 32), "suspicious" (category 4; n = 21), and "probably benign" (category 3; n = 16) by mammography and gray scale sonography, modeled on the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System classification. Power Doppler findings did not affect patient treatment. The authors subjectively evaluated the estimated area of vascularity, degree of enhancement following contrast agent administration, morphologic features, and distribution of vessels within the lesions.

RESULTS

The final diagnoses were malignant in 28 lesions and benign in 41. Significant enhancement after contrast agent injection was detected in both the malignant and benign groups. Only 2 criteria, estimated area of vascularity and degree of enhancement following contrast agent administration, proved to be significant diagnostic determinants for contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography (P < .001; interobserver agreements, 74.4 and 77.8, respectively). Contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography provided a higher specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value than power Doppler sonography but a lower sensitivity and negative predictive value than mammography-gray scale sonography. Only in the category 4 lesions could the combination of mammography-gray scale sonography and contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography accomplish a higher specificity (71%) and positive predictive value (70%) than mammography-gray scale sonography (39% and 53%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Power Doppler and contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography cannot be recommended as confirmatory tests in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 3 and category 5 lesions. Although contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography may help reduce unnecessary biopsies in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4 lesions, recommendation of its use has many drawbacks, such as imperfectly established criteria, lack of absolute certainty, and high cost.

The role of ultrasonography as an adjunct to mammography in the detection of breast cancer. a systematic review

The aim of this review was to summarise the diagnostic performance of ultrasonography as an adjunct to mammography in the detection of breast cancer and to identify clinical indications. A systematic review was performed of all publications in MEDLINE and EMBASE between 1990 and 2000 on the role of ultrasonography as an adjunct to mammography. 22 studies were included, showing a large variety of indications for ultrasonography and variations in the diagnostic performance of mammography and ultrasonography. There were six studies comparing a combined diagnosis of mammography and ultrasonography together with mammography alone, of which three studies had an increased sensitivity at the cost of a lower specificity. The methods of selecting the study population and interpretation of ultrasonography significantly influenced the diagnostic performance of mammography and ultrasonography relative to each other (P=0.003, P=0.03, respectively). Based on the studies reviewed, little evidence-based support was found to confirm the well recognised value of ultrasonography as an adjunct to mammography in the detection of breast cancer in clinical practice. Furthermore, no clinical indications for additional ultrasonography could be defined. The heterogeneity in the diagnostic performance in these studies may be explained by the methods of patient selection and ultrasonography interpretation, as well as by their poor quality.

How reliable is modern breast imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions in the symptomatic population?

AIM

To assess the ability of mammography and ultrasound individually and in combination to predict whether a breast abnormality is benign or malignant in patients with symptomatic breast disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients included were those in whom histological confirmation of the abnormality following surgical excision was available. Mammographic and ultrasound appearances were prospectively classified using a four-point scale (1 = no significant lesion, 2 = benign lesion, 3 = possibly malignant, 4 = probably malignant).

RESULTS

Histological confirmation following surgical excision was available in 559 patients, of which 303 were benign and 256 were malignant. The imaging classification was correlated with histology in these 559 lesions. In predicting final histology, the sensitivity and specificity of mammography alone were 78.9 and 82.7%, respectively, of ultrasound alone were 88.9 and 77.9%, respectively, and of mammography and ultrasound in combination were 94.2 and 67.9%, respectively. Only one patient had both a mammogram and ultrasound reported as normal (category 1 for both tests) in whom subsequent histology revealed a carcinoma (0.4% of all carcinomas).

CONCLUSION

We found that the extensive use of ultrasound increases the cancer detection rate in this selected population by 14%.

Comparison of indium-111 octreotide and thallium-201 scintigraphy in patients mammographically suspected of having breast cancer: preliminary results

Indium-111 octreotide and thallium-201 scintigraphic studies were compared in 21 patients (16 with palpable and five with non-palpable lesions) suspected of having breast malignancies on the basis of mammography. Early (15 min) and late (3 h) 201Tl (111 MBq) and 4-h and 24-h 111In-octreotide (111-148 MBq) static planar anterior images (matrix 256 x 256) were obtained on separate days. Images were evaluated both visually and quantitatively. Biopsy was performed following the imaging studies. Histopathology revealed 17 breast carcinomas (15 cases of invasive ductal carcinoma, one mucinous adenocarcinoma and one intraductal carcinoma) and four benign breast lesions (two fibroadenomas, one abscess and one case of fat necrosis). The means histopathological tumour size (mean largest diameter) was 3.38 +/- 1.9 cm. 111In-octreotide detected 16 of the 17 breast cancers (94%) while 201Tl detected 13 of them (76%). Both 111In-octreotide and 201Tl missed one non-palpable carcinoma showing only an isolated cluster of microcalcifications on mammography. The smallest tumour size detected by both agents 1.5 x 1.5 cm. Of the four benign lesions, only the breast abscess revealed both 201Tl and 111In-octreotide uptake. 111In-octreotide scan also showed tracer uptake in five of the six patients with histologically proven axillary metastases, while four of these six patients showed 201Tl uptake. The tumour/background (T/B) ratios of late 111In-octreotide and 201Tl images were 1.71 +/- 0.38 and 1.46 +/- 0.30 respectively (P = 0.039). In this preliminary study, 111In-octreotide yielded more favourable results than 201Tl in the detection of breast carcinomas. However, the diagnostic efficacy of 111In-octreotide imaging needs to be investigated in larger patient series.