Role of sonography in the detection of contralateral metachronous breast cancer in an Asian population

Jung Kim Min, Eun Kyung Kim, Young Kwak Jin, Byeong Woo Park, Seung Il Kim, Joohyuk Sohn, Keun Oh Ki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. This study was undertaken to retrospectively assess the contribution of sonographic surveillance in the early detection of metachronous contralateral breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively reviewed the pathologic, mammographic, and sonographic records of 51 patients with surgically proven metachronous bilateral breast cancer in 2,498 surgically proven breast cancers during 2000-2006. We first evaluated cancer staging according to the method of detection used to identify metachronous breast cancers. The sensitivity of imaging studies to identify the lesions was also assessed. We compared cancer staging on the basis of whether the patient was included in a screened group, which was one in which a mammogram and sonogram were obtained within 12 months of the pathologic diagnosis of metachronous cancer. Within the screened group, we compared cancer staging on the basis of whether a screening sonogram was obtained within 6 months of the diagnosis of metachronous cancer. RESULTS. The staging of metachronous cancers showed no statistically significant differences related to detection method. The sensitivity of sonography was 94% and of mammography was 80% in the detection of metachronous cancers. The cancer stage in the screened group was 0 or stage I in 81% and that in the unscreened group was stage II or III in 71% (p < 0.05). Among the screened group, no significant difference was seen in staging regardless of whether a screening sonogram was obtained in the 6 months after diagnosis of metachronous cancer (p = 0.576). CONCLUSION. Sonography alone detected 14% of metachronous contralateral breast cancers. The results of this study suggest that annual additional sonography with mammography contributes to the early detection of metachronous cancers. However, sonography every 6 months is unlikely to be helpful for the early detection of metachronous cancer.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)476-480
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume190
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008 Feb 1

Fingerprint

Neoplasm Staging
Ultrasonography
Breast Neoplasms
Population
Mammography
Neoplasms
Early Detection of Cancer

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{22e4272298224811942967ef264afc6d,
title = "Role of sonography in the detection of contralateral metachronous breast cancer in an Asian population",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. This study was undertaken to retrospectively assess the contribution of sonographic surveillance in the early detection of metachronous contralateral breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively reviewed the pathologic, mammographic, and sonographic records of 51 patients with surgically proven metachronous bilateral breast cancer in 2,498 surgically proven breast cancers during 2000-2006. We first evaluated cancer staging according to the method of detection used to identify metachronous breast cancers. The sensitivity of imaging studies to identify the lesions was also assessed. We compared cancer staging on the basis of whether the patient was included in a screened group, which was one in which a mammogram and sonogram were obtained within 12 months of the pathologic diagnosis of metachronous cancer. Within the screened group, we compared cancer staging on the basis of whether a screening sonogram was obtained within 6 months of the diagnosis of metachronous cancer. RESULTS. The staging of metachronous cancers showed no statistically significant differences related to detection method. The sensitivity of sonography was 94{\%} and of mammography was 80{\%} in the detection of metachronous cancers. The cancer stage in the screened group was 0 or stage I in 81{\%} and that in the unscreened group was stage II or III in 71{\%} (p < 0.05). Among the screened group, no significant difference was seen in staging regardless of whether a screening sonogram was obtained in the 6 months after diagnosis of metachronous cancer (p = 0.576). CONCLUSION. Sonography alone detected 14{\%} of metachronous contralateral breast cancers. The results of this study suggest that annual additional sonography with mammography contributes to the early detection of metachronous cancers. However, sonography every 6 months is unlikely to be helpful for the early detection of metachronous cancer.",
author = "Min, {Jung Kim} and Kim, {Eun Kyung} and Jin, {Young Kwak} and Park, {Byeong Woo} and Kim, {Seung Il} and Joohyuk Sohn and Ki, {Keun Oh}",
year = "2008",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2214/AJR.07.2683",
language = "English",
volume = "190",
pages = "476--480",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "2",

}

Role of sonography in the detection of contralateral metachronous breast cancer in an Asian population. / Min, Jung Kim; Kim, Eun Kyung; Jin, Young Kwak; Park, Byeong Woo; Kim, Seung Il; Sohn, Joohyuk; Ki, Keun Oh.

In: American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 190, No. 2, 01.02.2008, p. 476-480.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Role of sonography in the detection of contralateral metachronous breast cancer in an Asian population

AU - Min, Jung Kim

AU - Kim, Eun Kyung

AU - Jin, Young Kwak

AU - Park, Byeong Woo

AU - Kim, Seung Il

AU - Sohn, Joohyuk

AU - Ki, Keun Oh

PY - 2008/2/1

Y1 - 2008/2/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE. This study was undertaken to retrospectively assess the contribution of sonographic surveillance in the early detection of metachronous contralateral breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively reviewed the pathologic, mammographic, and sonographic records of 51 patients with surgically proven metachronous bilateral breast cancer in 2,498 surgically proven breast cancers during 2000-2006. We first evaluated cancer staging according to the method of detection used to identify metachronous breast cancers. The sensitivity of imaging studies to identify the lesions was also assessed. We compared cancer staging on the basis of whether the patient was included in a screened group, which was one in which a mammogram and sonogram were obtained within 12 months of the pathologic diagnosis of metachronous cancer. Within the screened group, we compared cancer staging on the basis of whether a screening sonogram was obtained within 6 months of the diagnosis of metachronous cancer. RESULTS. The staging of metachronous cancers showed no statistically significant differences related to detection method. The sensitivity of sonography was 94% and of mammography was 80% in the detection of metachronous cancers. The cancer stage in the screened group was 0 or stage I in 81% and that in the unscreened group was stage II or III in 71% (p < 0.05). Among the screened group, no significant difference was seen in staging regardless of whether a screening sonogram was obtained in the 6 months after diagnosis of metachronous cancer (p = 0.576). CONCLUSION. Sonography alone detected 14% of metachronous contralateral breast cancers. The results of this study suggest that annual additional sonography with mammography contributes to the early detection of metachronous cancers. However, sonography every 6 months is unlikely to be helpful for the early detection of metachronous cancer.

AB - OBJECTIVE. This study was undertaken to retrospectively assess the contribution of sonographic surveillance in the early detection of metachronous contralateral breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively reviewed the pathologic, mammographic, and sonographic records of 51 patients with surgically proven metachronous bilateral breast cancer in 2,498 surgically proven breast cancers during 2000-2006. We first evaluated cancer staging according to the method of detection used to identify metachronous breast cancers. The sensitivity of imaging studies to identify the lesions was also assessed. We compared cancer staging on the basis of whether the patient was included in a screened group, which was one in which a mammogram and sonogram were obtained within 12 months of the pathologic diagnosis of metachronous cancer. Within the screened group, we compared cancer staging on the basis of whether a screening sonogram was obtained within 6 months of the diagnosis of metachronous cancer. RESULTS. The staging of metachronous cancers showed no statistically significant differences related to detection method. The sensitivity of sonography was 94% and of mammography was 80% in the detection of metachronous cancers. The cancer stage in the screened group was 0 or stage I in 81% and that in the unscreened group was stage II or III in 71% (p < 0.05). Among the screened group, no significant difference was seen in staging regardless of whether a screening sonogram was obtained in the 6 months after diagnosis of metachronous cancer (p = 0.576). CONCLUSION. Sonography alone detected 14% of metachronous contralateral breast cancers. The results of this study suggest that annual additional sonography with mammography contributes to the early detection of metachronous cancers. However, sonography every 6 months is unlikely to be helpful for the early detection of metachronous cancer.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=38849177549&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=38849177549&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2214/AJR.07.2683

DO - 10.2214/AJR.07.2683

M3 - Article

C2 - 18212235

AN - SCOPUS:38849177549

VL - 190

SP - 476

EP - 480

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 2

ER -