Primary breast cancer in men: clinical, imaging, and pathologic findings in 57 patients

Imaging the Male Breast: Gynecomastia, Male Breast Cancer, and Beyond

The number of men undergoing breast imaging has increased in recent years, according to some reports. Most male breast concerns are related to benign causes, most commonly gynecomastia. The range of abnormalities typically encountered in the male breast is less broad than that encountered in women, given that lobule formation rarely occurs in men. Other benign causes of male breast palpable abnormalities with characteristic imaging findings include lipomas, sebaceous or epidermal inclusion cysts, and intramammary lymph nodes. Male breast cancer (MBC) is rare, representing up to 1% of breast cancer cases, but some data indicate that its incidence is increasing. MBC demonstrates some clinical features that overlap with those of gynecomastia, including a propensity for the subareolar breast. Men with breast cancer tend to present at a later stage than do women. MBC typically has similar imaging features to those of female breast cancer, often characterized by an irregular mass that may have associated calcifications. Occasionally, however, MBC has a benign-appearing imaging phenotype, with an oval shape and circumscribed margins, and therefore most solid breast masses in men require tissue diagnosis. Histopathologic evaluation may alternatively reveal other benign breast masses found in men, including papillomas, myofibroblastomas, and hemangiomas. Radiologists must be familiar with the breadth of male breast abnormalities to meet the rising challenge of caring for these patients. ©RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Male Breast Cancer: Imaging Considerations for Diagnosis and Surveillance

Male breast cancer accounts for less than 1% of all breast cancer cases. The important risk factors for the development of male breast cancer are family history, genetic mutations, obesity, liver disease, alcoholism, exogenous estrogen administration, and radiation exposure to the chest area. Despite its rarity, numerous studies have investigated the data on imaging considerations (mammogram, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)), but have addressed only certain aspects of male breast cancer. A comprehensive approach on the imaging characteristics, timing of imaging, prognostication based on imaging characteristics, and follow-up strategies in male breast cancer are still lacking. The purpose of this review article was to provide a comprehensive overview of the imaging findings, optimal timing to obtain imaging, and the appropriate follow-up strategies in male breast cancer survivors. This article also describes how imaging modalities can aid in determining prognosis. By addressing this knowledge gap, the article provides valuable insights for clinicians managing this uncommon yet clinically significant disease.

A Public Health Emergency: Breast Cancer Among Black Communities in the United States

While Black people have a similar incidence of breast cancer compared to White people, they have a 40% increased death rate. Black people are more likely to be diagnosed with aggressive subtypes such as triple-negative breast cancer. However, despite biological factors, systemic racism and social determinants of health create delays in care and barriers to treatment. While genetic testing holds incredible promise for Black people, uptake remains low and results may be challenging to interpret. There is a need for more robust, multidisciplinary, and antiracist interventions to reverse breast cancer-related racial disparities.

Radiological Features of Male Breast Neoplasms: How to Improve the Management of a Rare Disease

The primary aim of our study was to assess the main mammographic and ultrasonographic features of invasive male breast malignancies. The secondary aim was to evaluate whether a specific radiological presentation would be associated with a worse receptor profile. Radiological images (mammography and/or ultrasound) of all patients who underwent surgery for male invasive breast cancer in our institution between 2008 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed by two breast radiologists in consensus. All significant features of radiological presentation known in the literature were re-evaluated. Fifty-six patients were selected. The mean age at surgery of patients was 69 years (range: 35-81); in 82% of cases (46 patients), the histologic outcome was invasive ductal carcinoma. A total of 28 out of 56 (50%) patients had preoperative mammography; in 9/28 cases (32%), we found a mass with microcalcifications on mammography. The mass presented high density in 25 out of 28 patients (89%); the mass showed irregular margins in 15/28 (54%) cases. A total of 46 out of 56 patients had preoperative ultrasounds. The lesion showed a solid mass in 41/46 (89%) cases. In 5/46 patients (11%), the lesion was a mass with a mixed (partly liquid-partly solid) structure. We did not find any statistically significant correlation between major types of radiological presentation and tumor receptor arrangement. Knowledge of the main radiologic presentation patterns of malignant male breast neoplasm can help better manage this type of disease, which is rare but whose incidence is increasing.

Male Breast: A Review of the Literature and Current State of the Art of Diagnostic Imaging Work-Up

Pathological conditions affecting the male breast (MB) share some similarities with those found in women, while others are specific to men. The first part of this review provides an overview of MB disorders, exploring the most common types of MB diseases. The second part then emphasizes the state-of-the-art approaches proposed in the literature for screening and follow-up with MB cancer patients, which highlights the importance of tailored strategies for diagnosis, follow-up, and identifying high-risk populations. Considering the increasing attention in recent years on the topic, transgender individuals are also included in this review. Together with the MB, it is an understudied category thus far. This review aims to raise awareness among radiologists that MBs should be approached differently from female breasts, contributing to the advancement of medical knowledge, improving patient outcomes, and promoting early detection of MB disorders. The review also provides an update on breast cancer and screening in the transgender population.

Breast Cancer Screening in Men

Breast cancer screening has been highly successful in women in reducing mortality through early detection. In comparison, clinical detection of breast cancer remains the norm in men, and delay in diagnosis is reflected by a persistent survival disparity compared to women despite advances in modern therapy. Male breast cancer presents an interesting dilemma. While mammography is highly sensitive and specific for male breast cancer, routine screening is not justified by the overall low disease incidence. Yet there has been interest in leveraging mammography in targeted screening of men with identifiable risk factors to allow early detection, and early data may support this approach. The purpose of this article is to explore the potential utility of targeted breast cancer screening in men by examining unique clinical and biologic characteristics of male breast cancers that may lend themselves to mammographic detection. We will also discuss available evidence in screening outcomes in men and summarize recent updates in risk management recommendations in Society guidelines.

The nipple-areolar complex: anatomy, methods and pathologic findings, between senologist and dermatologist

The purpose of this presentation is to show the ultrasonography findings of normal variants and benign and malignant diseases that affect the nipple-areolar complex. Many of which have unspecific clinical and radiological presentations that can present a challenge for medical specialists. Experienced specialists need to know the different imaging modalities used to study the nipple-areolar complex and the aspect not exactly senology, as well as dermatologist who approach the ultrasound must know the anatomy of this complex area. We will show you a combined clinical and radiological approach to evaluate the nipple-areolar complex, the findings for the normal morphology and the most common benign and malignant diseases that can affect this region. We discuss the characteristics of the different ultrasonography findings and provide guidance on how to avoid artifacts and pitfalls.

Diagnostic Validity of Point-of-Care Breast Ultrasound for Females with Palpable Breast Masses

INTRODUCTION

With breast cancer as one of the frequent causes of cancer mortality today, the importance of ultrasound in its early detection has been apparent. It has been a valuable addition to the surgeon's diagnostic skills, contributing a vital role in clinical practice. We set out to determine the accuracy and value of breast ultrasound for primary imaging in women presenting with a clinically palpable mass in our outpatient clinic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of a point-of-care breast ultrasound among patients who consulted at the University of the Philippines-Philippine General Hospital (UP-PGH) Breast Care Clinic for a palpable breast mass without prior histopathologic diagnosis. The overall diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were determined. Sonographic features were also identified, and multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine significant predictors of malignancy.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were reviewed and compared with their histopathology results. The overall accuracy of a surgeon-performed breast ultrasound was 86.2%, sensitivity of 91.4%, specificity of 82.2%, PPV of 80% and NPV of 92.5%. Indistinct borders, posterior enhancement, unilateral shadowing, heterogeneous echo pattern and deeper than wide anterior-posterior ratio are sonographic features associated with malignancy.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that a point-of-care ultrasound for a palpable breast mass is reliable with a relatively good accuracy rate. Performing breast ultrasound in the clinic will help the surgeon evaluate the extent of disease preoperatively and be guided as to the optimal surgical management for the patient.

A case of bilateral male breast cancer- What does it teach us?

Male breast cancer is rare, with a lifetime risk of 1 in 833 males, with bilateral male breast cancer being extremely uncommon. This report describes a rare case of bilateral breast cancer in a 74-year-old male who presented with a breast lump and incidental calcifications in the contralateral breast. This case highlights the similarities, as well as differences, in presentation and imaging features of breast cancer in males and females. It also demonstrates how Magnetic Resonance Imaging can be a useful tool for pre-treatment planning of certain male breast cancers, especially to evaluate disease extent and to identify contralateral tumor.

Male Breast Cancer: Three Case Reports and a Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Male breast cancer (MBC) accounts for 0.5%-1% of all breast cancers diagnosed worldwide. However, its biological characteristics can be distinguished from that of female breast cancer (FBC).

CASE REPRESENTATION

The diagnostic and treatment approaches for MBC are mainly similar to that of FBC due to the lack of male breast cancer-related studies, clinical trials, and literature. An increasing number of retrospective and prospective studies have been conducted to clarify the individualized care for MBC. Herein, we report three cases of advanced MBC to describe the diagnostic approaches, treatment process, and survival prognosis.

CONCLUSION

MBC patients had older age, later stage at first diagnosis, higher expression of hormone receptors, and poor prognosis. A literature review was conducted to determine the incidence, risk factors, disease features, diagnosis, treatment, survival, and management of MBC.

Female-Type Presentation of Male Breast Cancer in Mammography and Its Clinical Implications

Introduction Male breast cancer is rare, accounting for about 1% of total breast cancer cases. In contrast to gynecomastia, which has a painful, soft, movable mass concentric to the nipple, the traditional presentation is a painless, hard, eccentric retro-areolar mass. However, when cancer occurs concurrently with significant gynecomastia, the mammographic pattern simulates female-type breast cancer, whereby there is a variable location and pattern of cancer. This study addresses the clinical and radiologic implications of this combination of gynecomastia and co-existing breast cancer. This combined presentation has not been highlighted thus far. Materials and method Following institutional approval, a retrospective study of male breast cancer was conducted over a 10-year period (2011-2021) in a single institution. Age, clinical presentation, risk factors, comorbidities, imaging results, and comprehensive pathology reports were all obtained from the picture archiving and communication system (PACS). Patients who did not have an initial imaging examination were eliminated from the study. Results There were 17 cases in all that were investigated. Nine of the men exhibited a classic presentation appearance, whereas eight had gynecomastia. The mean age was 58 years. The female-type presentation included multicentric cancers away from the nipple, diffuse parenchymal involvement, leukemia/lymphoma, and positive axillary lymphadenopathy without intramammary lesion, some of which had delayed investigation due to clinical suspicion of gynecomastia or breast swelling. All of the radiologic diagnoses were accurate. The pathology report in all except two cases was hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) negative. Conclusion Female-type presentation of male breast cancer is highlighted to prevent false clinical impressions and delayed radiologic investigation and treatment. Mammography readily identifies such cancers and should be requested at the initial clinical presentation of males with significant gynecomastia or risk factor.

The ins and outs of male breast and anterior chest wall lesions from childhood to adulthood

Physiological and pathological processes arising from the breast and anterior chest wall may share similar clinical presentations because of the small volume of male breasts. Therefore, imaging is frequently required to localise and characterise the lesion and guide biopsy when radiological findings are equivocal or suspicious. Mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and ultrasound are the mainstays of breast imaging work-up. Other imaging techniques such as computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron-emission tomography (PET) can sometimes augment the investigation and aid treatment planning. This article reviews the key imaging features of a wide spectrum of benign and malignant conditions that involve the male breast and anterior chest wall across various age groups. Familiarisation with the salient radiological findings is essential for reaching an accurate diagnosis and optimising management.

Breast microcalcifications: Past, present and future (Review)

Mammary microcalcifications (MCs) are calcium deposits that are considered as robust markers of breast cancer when identified on mammography. MCs are frequently associated with premalignant and malignant lesions. The aim of the present review was to describe the MC types and associated radiological and pathological aspects in detail, provide insights and approaches to the topic, and describe specific clinical scenarios. The primary MC types are composed of calcium oxalate, hydroxyapatite and hydroxyapatite associated with magnesium. The first type is usually associated with benign conditions, while the others remain primarily associated with malignancy. Radiologically, MCs are classified as benign or suspicious. MCs may represent an active pathological mineralization process rather than a passive process, such as degeneration or necrosis. Practical management of breast specimens requires finely calibrated radiological pathological procedures. Understanding the molecular and structural development of MCs may contribute to breast lesion detection and treatment.

Male Breast Cancer Review. A Rare Case of Pure DCIS: Imaging Protocol, Radiomics and Management

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of male breast is a rare lesion, often associated with invasive carcinoma. When the in situ component is present in pure form, histological grade is usually low or intermediate. Imaging is difficult as gynaecomastia is often present and can mask underlying findings. We report a rare case of pure high-grade DCIS in a young male patient, with associated intraductal papilloma and atypical ductal hyperplasia. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) showed an area of architectural distortion at the union of outer quadrants of the left breast without gynaecomastia. Triple assessment suggested performing a nipple-sparing mastectomy, which revealed the presence of a focal area of high-grade DCIS of 2 mm. DCIS, even of high grade, is difficult to detect with mammography and even more rare, especially when associated with other proliferative lesions. DBT with 2D synthetic reconstruction is useful as the imaging step of a triple assessment and it should be performed in both symptomatic and asymptomatic high-risk men to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions. We propose a diagnostic model to early detect breast cancer in men, optimizing resources according to efficiency, effectiveness and economy, and look forward to radiomics as a powerful tool to help radiologists.

Clinical Indications for Mammography in Men and Correlation With Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to examine the correlation between presenting clinical symptoms and imaging findings in men with breast cancer.

METHOD AND MATERIALS

Four hundred twenty-nine male patients who presented for mammography at one institution between January 2004 and December 2014 were retrospectively evaluated. Of the 429 patients, 291 presented with clinical symptoms for diagnostic mammography. The presenting clinical symptoms in 291 patients were recorded and correlated with imaging and histopathologic findings.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-one male patients were included. Some presented with multiple symptoms, for a total of 318 clinical symptoms. One hundred and ninety (65%) men presented with palpable abnormalities, 44 (15%) with nonfocal pain, 31 (11%) with breast swelling, 14 (5%) with breast enlargement, 13 (4%) with focal pain, 7 (2%) with skin changes, 6 (2%) with nipple discharge/changes and 13 (4%) with other symptoms (itching, throbbing and breast heaviness). A total of 290 patients underwent mammography and 176 underwent sonography. Forty-one malignancies were diagnosed, of which 24 (59%) were invasive ductal carcinoma. Nipple changes/discharge had a 100% positive predictive value for malignancy while breast pain showed a 0% positive predictive value. Fifty-two patients showed either a mass or a focal asymmetry on mammography, of which 38 (73%) were malignant. Three patients (1%) without a mass or focal asymmetry were diagnosed with malignancy.

CONCLUSION

Correlating clinical symptoms and imaging findings can help with timely and accurate diagnosis of breast cancer in men. Nipple discharge/changes and skin changes with palpable abnormalities and mammographic findings of masses and focal asymmetries were associated with breast cancer. Pain, breast enlargement, and breast swelling were unlikely to be associated with malignancy.

Differential diagnosis of benign and malignant male breast lesions in mammography

PURPOSE

To investigate the mammographic characteristics in discriminating benign and malignant male breast lesions.

METHODS

Male patients with breast lesions detected by preoperative mammography were enrolled in this study from Jan 2011 to Dec 2018. All lesions were confirmed by biopsy and classified into benign group or malignant group. Imaging features included lesions location, lesion type, lesion density, lesion eccentricity, accompanying signs(calcification, nipple retraction, thickened skin and enlarged lymph nodes) were recorded and analysed by statistical methods. The AUC was calculated to assess their diagnostic performance in distinguishing benign and malignant lesions. This model was further validated by 0.632 bootstrap.

RESULTS

A total of 93 men(median age: 60, range 32-81 years) were enrolled, 43 patients in the benign group and 50 patients in the malignant group. In the univariate logistic analysis, age, lesion location, lesion type, lesion density, lesion eccentricity, calcification, nipple retraction and skin thickening were significantly different (p < 0.05). When the lesion showed a mass in mammography, those with a circumscribed margin were likely malignant (p < 0.05). In the multivariate logistic analysis, non-retro-areola lesions (OR: 6.900, 95 % CI: 1.413∼33.691, p < 0.05), eccentric lesions (OR: 14.566, 95 % CI: 2.800∼75.777, p < 0.05), high-density lesions (OR: 11.052, 95 % CI: 2.235∼54.666, p < 0.05), calcification (OR: 12.715 95 % CI: 1.316∼122.848, p < 0.05) and nipple retraction (OR: 24.681, 95 % CI: 2.853∼213.542 p < 0.05) were associated with breast cancer. Those variables were used to build logistic model and the AUC of the imaging model was 0.904. The imaging model was verified by 0.632 bootstrap resampling, and the AUC after 0.632 bootstrap was 0.892.

CONCLUSION

Mammographic characteristics could contribute to distinguishing malignant and benign male breast lesions, and the imaging model showed excellent diagnostic performance, which may help to guide clinical decision-making.

Conventional Imaging and Sonoelastography Findings of Oncocytic Breast Carcinoma in a Man

Oncocytic breast carcinoma (OBC) is one of the rare types of invasive breast carcinoma in according to the classification of The World Health Organization. Herein we represent imaging findings of a case of 69-year-old male patient with OBC.

Male Breast Cancer with Radiological and Histopathological Findings

Objectives

We aimed to remind and emphasize the importance of male breast cancer with radiological and histopathological results of the patients diagnosed in our institution.

Methods

Men who had proven breast cancer by histopathological analysis between February 2010-April 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. The mammographic, ultrasonographic, magnetic resonance and positron-emission-tomography imaging features and histopathological results of the masses were noted.

Results

Twenty-five men were included in this study. Mean age of the patients was 62.9 (min:42; max: 82) with a mean size of lesions was 26.4 mm (min:10 mm; max: 70 mm). All the lesions were presented as a palpable mass. According to imaging features of the five patients who had mammography, all the four patients were presented as a mass but one patient as asymmetrical density. According to imaging features of the 20 patients who had an ultrasound, 16 (80%) lesions were presented as hypoechoic solid masses with irregular margins, while four (20%) were presented as complex-cystic masses with irregular margins. All the patients were diagnosed as invasive ductal cancer with luminal subtype by histopathological analysis.

Conclusion

Even at young ages, the palpable lesion may be the only symptom of male breast cancer. Male breast cancer is generally presented as retroareolar mass and detected in advanced stages, probably due to low awareness and lack of screening programme. Invasive ductal cancer is the most common type of male breast cancer with the luminal subtype.

Male patients with unilateral breast symptoms: an optimal imaging approach

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the usefulness of bilateral mammography in male patients with unilateral breast symptoms, including investigation of the diagnostic performance of unilateral and bilateral reviews and the average glandular dose (AGD) per exposure.

METHODS

Two hundred seventy-one consecutive male patients (mean age, 57 years) with unilateral breast symptoms underwent bilateral mammography. Image interpretation was performed in two ways, first with a unilateral review of the symptomatic breast and then with a bilateral review. A modified BI-RADS scale (from 1 to 5) was used. The diagnostic performance of unilateral and bilateral reviews was compared, and contralateral breast abnormalities and the AGD per exposure were recorded. We also analyzed ultrasound (US) results and compared them with mammography.

RESULTS

Of 271 male patients, 29 were pathologically diagnosed with breast cancer. There was no bilateral breast cancer. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were 96.6%, 96.7%, 77.8%, 99.6%, and 96.7%, respectively, for unilateral review, and 96.6%, 95.9%, 73.7%, 99.6%, and 95.9% for bilateral review. Receiver operator characteristic analysis showed excellent diagnostic performance for both methods: the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.966 for unilateral review and 0.962 for bilateral review (p = 0.415). The mean AGD per exposure was 1.10 ± 0.29 mGy for symptomatic breast and 1.04 ± 0.30 mGy for contralateral breast (p < 0.001). Diagnostic performance parameters of US were not significantly different from bilateral or unilateral review of mammography.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic performance of unilateral mammography is comparable with bilateral mammography in male patients with unilateral breast symptoms. Unilateral mammography also has the advantage of reducing radiation exposure.

KEY POINTS

• There is limited knowledge about standardized guidelines or recommendations for imaging the male breast. • Unilateral mammography for male patients with unilateral breast symptoms showed comparable diagnostic performance with bilateral mammography. • Both unilateral and bilateral mammography showed excellent diagnostic performance in the assessment of male patients with unilateral breast symptoms.

Image-based screening for men at high risk for breast cancer: Benefits and drawbacks

Male breast cancer is a rare malignancy. Due to low prevalence and limited data to support male breast cancer screening, there are currently no recommendations for image-based screening in asymptomatic men and few recommendations for men at high risk for breast cancer. However, symptomatically diagnosed cancers in men are typically advanced, suggesting that earlier detection may improve outcomes. In this article we briefly review the risk factors for male breast cancer, and discuss the potential benefits and possible drawbacks of routine image-based screening for men at high risk for breast cancer.

Mammographic screening in male patients at high risk for breast cancer: is it worth it?

PURPOSE

To investigate the utility of mammography for breast cancer screening in a population of males at increased risk for breast cancer.

METHODS

In this HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved single-institution study, mammography records and clinical data of 827 male patients who underwent digital mammography from September 2011-July 2018 were analyzed via the electronic medical record. 664 of these men presented with masses, pain, or nipple discharge and were excluded from this study. The remaining 163 asymptomatic men with familial and/or personal history of breast cancer, or with a known germline mutation in BRCA, underwent screening mammography and were included in this analysis.

RESULTS

163 asymptomatic men (age: mean 63 years, range 24-87 years) underwent 806 screening mammograms. 125/163 (77%) had a personal history of breast cancer and 72/163 (44%) had a family history of breast cancer. 24/163 (15%) were known mutation carriers: 4/24 (17%) BRCA1 and 20/24 (83%) BRCA2. 792/806 (98%) of the screening mammograms were negative (BI-RADS 1 or 2); 10/806 (1.2%) were classified as BI-RADS 3, all of which were eventually downgraded to BI-RADS 2 on follow-up. 4/806 (0.4%) mammograms were abnormal (BI-RADS 4/5): all were malignant. The cancer detection rate in this cohort was 4.9 cancers/1000 examinations.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort, screening mammography yielded a cancer detection rate of 4.9 cancers/1000 examinations which is like the detection rate of screening mammography in a population of women at average risk, indicating that screening mammography is of value in male patients at high risk for breast cancer.

Ultrasonographic and Mammographic Findings of Male Breast Disease

Most male breast diseases are benign, although malignancies can also occur. Gynecomastia, the most common abnormality in the male breast, has characteristic imaging findings differentiating it from cancer. Fewer than 1% of patients with breast cancer are men, but the incidence of male breast cancer is increasing worldwide. Additionally, breast cancer often presents at a more advanced stage in men than in women due to delayed diagnosis. Understanding imaging features of male breast disease is important for an accurate diagnosis and optimal care. This article reviews ultrasonography and mammography findings of benign and malignant diseases of the male breast.

Male Breast Cancer in the Age of Genetic Testing: An Opportunity for Early Detection, Tailored Therapy, and Surveillance

In detection, treatment, and follow-up, male breast cancer has historically lagged behind female breast cancer. On the whole, breast cancer is less common among men than among women, limiting utility of screening, yet the incidence of male breast cancer is rising, and there are men at high risk for breast cancer. While women at high risk for breast cancer are well characterized, with clearly established guidelines for screening, supplemental screening, risk prevention, counseling, and advocacy, men at high risk for breast cancer are poorly identified and represent a blind spot in public health. Today, more standardized genetic counseling and wider availability of genetic testing are allowing identification of high-risk male relatives of women with breast cancer, as well as men with genetic mutations predisposing to breast cancer. This could provide a new opportunity to update our approach to male breast cancer. This article reviews male breast cancer demographics, risk factors, tumor biology, and oncogenetics; recognizes how male breast cancer differs from its female counterpart; highlights its diagnostic challenges; discusses the implications of the widening clinical use of multigene panel testing; outlines current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines (version 1, 2018) for high-risk men; and explores the possible utility of targeted screening and surveillance. Understanding the current state of male breast cancer management and its challenges is important to shape future considerations for care. Shifting the paradigm of male breast cancer detection toward targeted precision medicine may be the answer to improving clinical outcomes of this uncommon disease. ^©RSNA, 2018.

Clinical and ultrasonographic features of male breast tumors: A retrospective analysis

Objective

The purpose of this study was to determine clinical and ultrasonographic characteristics of male breast tumors.

Methods

The medical records of male patients with breast lesions were retrieved from an electronic medical record database and a pathology database and retrospectively reviewed. A total of 112 men (125 breast masses) with preoperative breast ultrasonography (US) were included (median age, 59.50 years; age range, 15–96 years). Data extracted included patient age, if the lesions were bilateral, palpable, and tender, and the presence of nipple discharge. Breast lesion features on static US images were reviewed by three experienced radiologists without knowledge of physical examination or pathology results, original breast US image interpretations, or surgical outcomes. The US features were documented according to the BI-RADS (Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System) US lexicons. A forth radiologist compiled the data for analysis.

Results

Of the 125 breast masses, palpable tender lumps and bilateral synchronous masses were more likely to be benign than malignant (both, 100% vs 0%, P < 0.05). Advanced age and bloody discharge from nipples were common in malignant lesions (P <0.05). A mass eccentric to a nipple, irregular shape, the presence of an echogenic halo, predominantly internal vascularity, and rich color flow signal on color Doppler ultrasound were significantly related to malignancy (all, P < 0.05). An echogenic halo and the presence of rich color flow signal were independent predictors of malignancy.

Conclusion

Specific clinical and US characteristics of male breast tumors may help guide treatment, and determine if surgery or conservative treatment is preferable.

Ultrasonographic assessment of male breast diseases

Although rare and accounting for less than 1% of all breast cancers, the incidence of breast cancer in men has increased by 26% over the past few decades. Very little has been reported on the sonographic appearance of benign and malignant male breast conditions. The aim of this study was to describe the ultrasonographic features of male breast disease and the value of ultrasound in the evaluation of male breast disease. Between December 2006 and October 2014, ultrasound examinations were performed in 560 male patients presenting with enlargement of, pain in, and/or a lump in the breast. One hundred and thirty-six patients (24.3%) underwent surgical excision, and 424 patients (75.7%) were diagnosed by ultrasound. Their ultrasonographic features were retrospectively evaluated. The final diagnoses were gynecomastia (n = 537), primary breast cancer (n = 9), lipoma (n = 7), chronic mastitis (n = 6), and fibroadenoma (n = 1). Of the 560 lesions, 356 (63.6%) were classified as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 2, 191 (34.1%) were classified as BI-RADS category 3, and 13 (2.3%) were classified as BI-RADS 4 or 5. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of the detection of malignant breast masses according to ultrasound were 100%, 99.3%, 69.2%, 100%, and 97.7% respectively. The sonographic patterns of gynecomastia were nodular (n = 131, 24.4%), dendritic (n = 50, 9.3%), and diffuse glandular (n = 356, 66.3%). Color Doppler flow imaging revealed hypervascularity in five of these malignant masses, moderate vascularity in two of the masses, and mild vascularity in the remaining two masses. Other diseases included in the study are also described. Ultrasonography (US) is useful in the diagnosis of male breast diseases, especially in differentiating cancer from benign lesions.

Efficiency of Imaging Modalities in Male Breast Disease: Can Ultrasound Give Additional Information for Assessment of Gynecomastia Evolution?

Objective

The purpose of this study is to present mammography and ultrasound findings of male breast lesions and to investigate the ability of diagnostic modalities in estimating the evolution of gynecomastia.

Materials and Methods

Sixty-nine male patients who admitted to Taksim and Bakirkoy Education and Research Hospitals and underwent mammography (MG) and ultrasonography (US) imaging were retrospectively evaluated. Duration of symptoms and mammographic types of gynecomastia according to Appelbaum's classifications were evaluated, besides the sonographic findings in mammographic types of gynecomastia.

Results

The distribution of 69 cases were as follows: gynecomastia 47 (68.11%), pseudogynecomastia 6 (8.69%) primary breast carcinoma 7 (10.14%), metastatic carcinoma 1 (1.4%), epidermal inclusion cyst 2 (2.8%), abscess 2 (2.8%), lipoma 2 (2.8%), pyogenic granuloma 1 (1.4%), and granulomatous lobular mastitis 1 (1.4%). Gynecomastia patients who had symptoms less than 1 year had nodular gynecomastia (34.6%) as opposed to dendritic gynecomastia (61.5%) (p<0.01) based on mammography results according to Appelbaum's classifications. In patients having symptoms for 1 to 2 years, diffuse gynecomastia (70%) had a higher rate than the dendritic type (20%). Patients having the symptoms more than 2 years had diffuse gynecomastia (57.1%) while 42.9% had dendritic gynecomastia (p<0.001). With sonographic examination patients who had symptoms less than 1 year had higher rates of dendritic gynecomastia (92.3%) than noduler type (1.9 %). Patients having symptoms for 1 to 2 years had more dentritic gynecomastia (70%) than diffuse type (30%). Patients having symptoms more than 2 years had diffuse gynecomastia (57.1%) comparable to dendritic gynecomastia (42.9 %).

Conclusion

Diagnostic imaging modalities are efficient tools for estimation of gynecomastia evolution as well as the diagnosis of other male breast diseases. There seems to be an incongruity between duration of clinical complaints and diagnostic imaging classification of gynecomastia. The use of these high resolution US findings may demonstrate an early phase fibrosis especially in patients visualized by mammography as with nodular phase.

Shear-wave elastography quantitative assessment of the male breast: added value to distinguish benign and malignant palpable masses

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the ability of shear-wave elastography (SWE) to distinguish between benign and malignant palpable masses of the adult male breast.

METHODS

Clinical examination, mammography, B-mode and Doppler ultrasound findings and SWE quantitative parameters were compared in 50 benign lesions (including 40 gynaecomastias) and 15 malignant lesions (invasive ductal carcinomas) from 65 patients who were consecutively addressed for specialized advice at our comprehensive cancer centre. Mean elasticity (El mean), maximum elasticity (El max), El mean of the surrounding fatty tissue and lesion to fat ratio (El ratio) were reported for each patient.

RESULTS

Malignant masses displayed significantly higher El mean (p < 0.0001), El max (p < 0.0001) and El ratio (p < 0.0001) compared to benign masses without overlap of values between the two groups. By adding SWE to clinical examination, mammography and ultrasound, all the lesions would have been retrospectively correctly diagnosed as benign or malignant. One false positive could have been downstaged, 14/65 undetermined masses could have been correctly reclassified as 4 malignant and 10 benign lesions, for which biopsies could have consequently been avoided.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of male breast palpable masses by SWE demonstrates that malignant masses are significantly stiffer lesions and may improve diagnostic management when clinical examination, mammography and conventional ultrasound are doubtful. Advances in knowledge: Quantitative SWE is feasible in male breast and could be of great interest to help classify doubtful lesions after classical clinical and radiological evaluations, probably because of different anatomy and different tumours epidemiology compared with female breast.

Radiologic presentation of a myofibroblastoma of the adult male breast

We present the case of a 50-year-old male with bilateral gynecomastia who was incidentally found to have 0.8-cm subareolar mass on computed tomography. Mammographic and sonographic characteristics of the lesion are described as well as a brief historical review of myofibroblastoma, a rare mesenchymal tumor.

Breast US as primary imaging modality for diagnosing gynecomastia

AIM

To assess the role of breast US in diagnosing and classifying gynecomastia as the primary imaging modality and to compare US findings and classification system with the mammographic ones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

48 patients suspected of having gynecomastia underwent mammography and US. Two radiologists in consensus retrospectively evaluated mammograms and sonograms. Both US and mammographic images were evaluated categorizing gynecomastia into non-mass, nodular and flame shaped patterns. The two category assignations were compared in order to find any difference. The reference standard for both the classification systems was represented by the cytological examination in 18 out of 44 cases (41%) and the six-month US follow-up in the remaining cases.

RESULTS

The US examination revealed pseudo-gynecomastia in 4/48 (8%) and true gynecomastia in the remaining 44 (92%). Gynecomastia was bilateral in 25/44 cases (57%) and unilateral in the remaining 19 (43%). The cases of true gynecomastia included non mass shape in 26/44 cases (59%), nodular shape in 12 (27%) and flame shape in 6 (14%). The mammographic examination revealed the same results as compared with US findings. 18/44 (41%) patients affected by nodular or dendritic gynecomastia underwent cytological examination confirming the presence of glandular tissue and the benign nature of the clinical condition.

CONCLUSIONS

US could be proposed as the primary imaging tool for diagnosing and classifying gynecomastia, avoiding unnecessary Xray examinations or invasive procedures in case of diffuse gynecomastia. In case of nodular or dendritic patterns, biopsy remains mandatory for a definitive diagnosis.

Case report of male breast cancer detected on magnetic resonance imaging

Male breast cancers (MBC) are rare, accounting for <1% of all breast cancers. The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for male breast cancer is not generally indicated. We present an unusual case where conventional imaging for a suspected MBC was equivocal and MRI was required to assist in diagnosis.

Mammography Findings of Male Breast Diseases

Over the past 2 decades, the percentage of men presenting with breast complaints has increased from 0.8% to 2.4%, and men now account for 1% of all breast cancer cases. The most common male breast mass is gynecomastia, followed by lipoma and epidermal inclusion cysts. Because there is a paucity of parenchyma as compared with the female breast, the malignancy rapidly progresses to the next stage, with the appearance of secondary signs like nipple retraction, fixation to deeper tissues, skin ulceration or adenopathy. Diagnostic evaluation is needed only when the palpable mass is unilateral, hard, fixed, peripheral to the nipple, or associated with nipple discharge, skin changes, or lymphadenopathy. Male breast cancer usually occurs in a subareolar location or is positioned eccentric to the nipple; occasionally, it occurs in a peripheral position. Secondary signs like skin thickening, nipple retraction, and axillary lymphadenopathy may be seen. Microcalcifications can occur. Mammography can accurately distinguish between malignant and benign male breast disease. Radiologists are generally less familiar with breast disease in males compared with females. In this article, we discuss the clinical, and mammographic features of a variety of benign and malignant diseases that can occur in the male breast.

Do columnar cell lesions exist in the male breast?

AIMS

In females, columnar cell lesions (CCLs) have been recognized as putative precursor lesions of low-grade breast cancer, but their role in male breast carcinogenesis is as yet unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We reviewed surgical resections from males with breast cancer (n = 89), gynaecomastia (n = 20) and normal breast specimens from autopsies (n = 5) for the presence of CCL. In addition, we performed immunohistochemistry for cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6), CK14 and oestrogen receptor alpha (ER). In 19 of 89 resections (two DCIS cases and 17 invasive carcinoma), some individual ducts were found to contain cells with snouts on the luminal border but lacking further typical columnar cell lesion features. We mainly found three-layered ductal epithelium, characteristic for gynaecomastia and confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Moreover, we found a few ducts in male breast cancer sections that were clonally negative for basal cytokeratins.

CONCLUSION

We found no lesions with convincing CCL morphology at the periphery of invasive male breast cancers, in gynaecomastia or in normal male breast specimens. Although we cannot completely exclude the existence of CCLs in the male breast, these lesions seem to be very uncommon and are therefore unlikely to play a major role in male breast carcinogenesis.

Male breast disease: pictorial review with radiologic-pathologic correlation

The male breast is susceptible to many of the same pathologic processes as the female breast. Many of these conditions have mammographic, ultrasonographic (US), and magnetic resonance imaging findings that allow differentiation between clearly benign conditions and those that require biopsy. Gynecomastia is the most common abnormality of the male breast and has characteristic imaging features that usually allow differentiation from malignancy. Mammography is the initial imaging modality for a clinically suspicious mass. A palpable mass that is occult or incompletely imaged at mammography mandates targeted US. Suspicious or indeterminate masses require biopsy, which can usually be performed with US guidance. Approximately 0.7% of breast cancers occur in men. Men with breast cancer often present at a more advanced stage than do women owing to a delay in diagnosis. Benign breast neoplasms that may occur in men include angiolipoma, schwannoma, intraductal papilloma, and lipoma. Benign nonneoplastic entities that may occur in the male breast include intramammary lymph node, sebaceous cyst, diabetic mastopathy, hematoma, fat necrosis, subareolar abscess, breast augmentation, venous malformation, secondary syphilis, and nodular fasciitis. Familiarity with the salient features of the classic benign male breast conditions will allow accurate imaging interpretation and avoid unnecessary and often invasive treatment. © RSNA, 2013.

From the radiologic pathology archives: diseases of the male breast: radiologic-pathologic correlation

Male breast disease includes a variety of benign and malignant conditions, many of which are hormonally influenced. Gynecomastia and skin lesions account for the majority of conditions in symptomatic men with a palpable abnormality, and these conditions should be accurately recognized. Imaging patterns of gynecomastia include nodular, dendritic, and diffuse patterns. Histopathologically, the nodular and dendritic patterns correlate with the florid and quiescent (fibrotic) phases of gynecomastia, respectively. The diffuse pattern may have features of both phases and is associated with exposure to exogenous estrogen. Benign-appearing palpable masses in male patients should be approached cautiously, given the overlapping morphologic features of benign and malignant tumors. In addition to gynecomastia, other benign male breast tumors include lipoma, pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia, granular cell tumor, fibromatosis, myofibroblastoma, schwannoma, and hemangioma. Male breast cancer accounts for 1% of all breast carcinomas. Invasive ductal carcinoma accounts for the majority of cases in adult males and typically appears as a subareolar mass without calcifications that is eccentric to the nipple. Other epithelial and mesenchymal tumors that may occur, albeit not as commonly as in women, include papillary carcinoma, invasive lobular carcinoma, adenoid cystic carcinoma, liposarcoma, dermatofibrosarcoma, pleomorphic hyalinizing angiectatic tumor, basal cell carcinoma of the nipple, hematopoietic malignancies, and secondary tumors. Knowledge of the natural history, clinical characteristics, and imaging features of tumors that occur in the male breast will help narrow the radiologic differential diagnosis and optimize treatment.

Pathologies of the male breast

The majority of breast lesions in men are benign. Gynaecomastia is a very common condition in which hormonal changes cause male breasts to enlarge. Three radiological patterns of gynaecomastia have been described: nodular, dendritic, and diffuse glandular pattern. The main differential diagnosis is lipomastia, which is when adipose tissue deposits are found in the subcutaneous tissue. Male breast cancer is rare. The main risk factors are pathologies that cause hormonal imbalances, a history of chest irradiation, and a family history of breast cancer (particularly in families carrying a mutation of the gene BRCA2). Mammography usually shows a mass with no calcifications. Sonography is useful to investigate local disease spread, and for detecting any enlarged axillary lymph nodes. MRI is not currently indicated to investigate male breast cancer. Very often, the clinical examination alone is enough to distinguish benign lesions from malignant lesions. Imaging must not be automatically carried out, but rather it should be used when the diagnosis is clinically uncertain or when patients present risk factors for breast cancer, as well as for guiding biopsies and for assessing disease spread.

Ultrasonography of the male breast

The male breast has been insufficiently explored in the medical literature, particularly that dealing with ultrasonography, although this topic is almost as vast and varied as that of the female breast. The purpose of this article is to provide a schematic review of the most frequent breast lesions encountered in males and their sonographic appearances. After a brief introduction on the anatomy of the male breast, the authors review the non-neoplastic (gynecomastia, pseudogynecomastia, cysts, inflammatory diseases, and Mondor disease) and neoplastic (benign and malignant) lesions encountered in this organ.

Pictorial essay: Mammography of the male breast

Mammography is an imaging modality that is widely perceived to be of use only in women for the detection and diagnosis of breast pathologies. Here, we present a pictorial essay on the mammographic spectrum of male breast pathologies.

Imaging characteristics of male breast disease

The purpose of the study was to describe the imaging findings of male breast disease. One hundred and sixty-four male patients, who underwent mammography and ultrasonography (US) between January 1999 and December 2008, were retrospectively evaluated. Seventy-five patients (46%) underwent biopsy, and 89 patients (54%) were diagnosed radiologically. The radiologic and pathologic diagnoses in 164 cases of this series were 13 cancers (8%), including one ipsilateral and one contralateral breast cancers, 147 cases of gynecomastia (90%), one fibroadenoma (0.6%), two cases of fibrocystic disease of the breast (1.2%), and one epidermoid inclusion cyst (0.6%). Three mammographic patterns were adequate to describe all 147 cases of gynecomastia in our series: 53 patients (36%) had nodular gynecomastia, 46 patients (31%) had dendritic gynecomastia, and 48 patients (33%) had diffuse gynecomastia. Gynecomastia was unilateral in 65% of cases (n=95), and bilateral in 35% of cases (n=52). On physical examination, two of the malignant lesions had no clinic features of malignancy (15%). On mammography, 11 of 13 malignant masses were demonstrated (85%). A mass with microcalcifications was seen on mammograms in one case (9%). The contours of the masses were irregular in nine cases (82%), well-circumscribed in two cases (18%). The location of the masses was retroareolar in seven cases (64%) and eccentric to the nipple in four cases (36%). The size of the masses varied between 0.5 cm and 5 cm (mean 2.4 cm). Nipple retraction was evident in five cases (45%), and skin thickening in four cases (36%). All of the malignant masses were demonstrated on ultrasound; however, one of them was seen retrospectively after mammography. All of the masses were hypoechoic and solid, the contours were well-defined and smooth in two masses (15%), and irregular in 11 masses (85%), and five masses (39%) had posterior prominent shadowing. Axillary lymphadenopathia was detected in two cases (15%). One patient had a previous contralateral breast cancer, and one had an ipsilateral. On mammography, breast cancer characteristically exhibits an irregular subareolar mass, nipple retraction, and skin ulceration or thickening, but sometimes breast cancer has a well-circumscribed contour and punctuated microcalcifications. Ultrasonography is essential and useful for further characterization and helpful for demonstrating lymphadenopathies of the axillary region.

Image presentation. Sonographic appearances of benign and malignant male breast disease with mammographic and pathologic correlation

OBJECTIVE

Imaging of the male breast is most often performed for the evaluation of a clinical abnormality such as breast enlargement or tenderness, a palpable mass, nipple skin changes, or nipple discharge. Most breast lesions encountered in men are benign. Malignant breast lesions are less frequent; breast cancer accounts for less than 1% of all male cancers in the United States. The initial imaging evaluation of a finding in the male breast is performed with mammography. Sonography is frequently used as an adjunct to mammography but is less often used as the primary imaging modality. The objective of this article is to provide readers with a thorough review of the sonographic appearances of benign and malignant male breast disease.

METHODS

We reviewed our institution's case database to identify male patients who underwent mammography, sonography, and subsequent biopsy of a breast lesion. These cases were collected and reviewed to select the best imaging examples.

RESULTS

A spectrum of benign and malignant male breast disease is presented with corresponding sonographic, mammographic, and pathologic imaging. For each entity, the salient imaging findings and typical clinical presentation are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies in the literature have reported on the mammographic and sonographic imaging features of primary breast carcinoma in men. However, very little has been reported on the sonographic appearance of benign and malignant male breast conditions. Recognition and correct identification of pathologic male breast entities on sonography is essential to determine appropriate management recommendations and avoid unnecessary biopsies.

Sonographic features of gynecomastia

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify sonographic features of gynecomastia.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on all male patients with breast symptoms imaged with breast sonography over a 5-year period. Breast sonograms in 158 men were jointly reviewed by 3 investigators. Sonograms were assessed for the presence or absence of a mass: (1) if mass present, (a) location of the mass, (b) vascularity, (c), axis, (d) appearance of posterior tissues, and (e) tissue echo texture; and (2) if mass absent, anteroposterior (AP) depth at the nipple (increased if >1 cm).

RESULTS

Of the 237 men with breast symptoms, 79 with only mammography were excluded. Of the 158 who had sonography with or without mammography, 5 without gynecomastia were also excluded. A total of 153 men included in the study presented with pain (n = 38), a lump (n = 95), both pain and a lump (n = 17), or nipple discharge (n = 3). Nine of 153 with gynecomastia had a biopsy. A total of 219 sonographic examinations were performed, which revealed 73 masses (33%): 20 (27%) nodular, 20 (27%) poorly defined, and 33 (45%) flame shaped. All masses were retroareolar, with 57 (78%) hypoechoic, 54 (73%) avascular, 60 (82%) parallel to the chest wall, and 47 (64%) without posterior enhancement or shadowing. Of the 146 without masses (67%), 141 (97%) had increased AP depth at the nipple.

CONCLUSIONS

Gynecomastia is a clinical diagnosis, and mammography is the primary imaging modality when indicated. However, if sonography is used when mammography is declined or when mammography is inconclusive, it is important to recognize the various described patterns of gynecomastia to avoid unnecessary biopsy based on sonographic findings.