Additional breast ultrasound examinations in clustered calcifications

For improving diagnostic performance

Young Kim Hee, Bo Kyoung Seo, Hee Young Kim, Yie Ann, Ran Cho Kyu, Young Seol Hae, Sang Hoon Cha, Hyun Kim Baek, Gil Soo Son, Won Bae Jung

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We wanted to determine whether additional breast ultrasound examinations are needed for patients who have clustered calcifications found by mammography for the detection of breast carcinomas. Methods: We performed targeted ultrasound examinations in 125 consecutive patients who had clustered calcifications found by mammography. Forty-eight pathologically proven patients with 61 breast lesions were included in this study (26 invasive carcinomas, 10 ductal carcinomas in situ and 25 benign diseases). Two breast radiologists evaluated the mammography and the ultrasound findings and they graded the probability of malignancy by consensus as follows: definitely benign 1, probably benign 2, probably malignant 3, and definitely malignant 4. The diagnostic performance values, including the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, for mammography and additional ultrasound were compared using McNemar's test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. On the ROC analysis, areas under the ROC curves (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for making the diagnosis of breast carcinoma by mammography were 88.9%, 12.0%, 57.4%, 59.3%, and 42.9% and those for additional ultrasound were 94.4%, 64.0%, 82.0%, 79.1%, and 88.9%, respectively. The differences of specificity and accuracy were statistically significant (p=0.0003). On the ROC analysis, ACU were significantly different between mammography (AUC=0.586, 95% CI=0.453-0.711) and ultrasound (AUC=0.823, 95% CI=0.704-0.909) (p=0.003). Clustered calcifications with associated masses or ductal changes on additional breast ultrasound had high frequency of malignancies, 79% or 73%. In addition, 87% of malignant masses were invasive carcinomas and 45% of malignant ductal changes were ductal carcinomas in situ. Conclusion: Additional breast ultrasound examinations for the lesions with clustered calcifications on mammography can improve the diagnostic performance and significantly contribute to the specificity and accuracy of a diagnosis of breast carcinoma. In addition, the ultrasound features may predict the pathologic findings such as benignity or malignancy and invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)142-150
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Breast Cancer
Volume12
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009 Sep 1

Fingerprint

ROC Curve
Mammography
Breast
Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating
Mammary Ultrasonography
Confidence Intervals
Breast Neoplasms
Carcinoma
Area Under Curve
Sensitivity and Specificity
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Breast neoplasms
  • Calcification
  • Mammography
  • Ultrasonography

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Additional breast ultrasound examinations in clustered calcifications : For improving diagnostic performance. / Hee, Young Kim; Seo, Bo Kyoung; Kim, Hee Young; Ann, Yie; Kyu, Ran Cho; Hae, Young Seol; Cha, Sang Hoon; Baek, Hyun Kim; Son, Gil Soo; Jung, Won Bae.

In: Journal of Breast Cancer, Vol. 12, No. 3, 01.09.2009, p. 142-150.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hee, Young Kim ; Seo, Bo Kyoung ; Kim, Hee Young ; Ann, Yie ; Kyu, Ran Cho ; Hae, Young Seol ; Cha, Sang Hoon ; Baek, Hyun Kim ; Son, Gil Soo ; Jung, Won Bae. / Additional breast ultrasound examinations in clustered calcifications : For improving diagnostic performance. In: Journal of Breast Cancer. 2009 ; Vol. 12, No. 3. pp. 142-150.
@article{d700c9e4da7043f2896a2dfd2abfad43,
title = "Additional breast ultrasound examinations in clustered calcifications: For improving diagnostic performance",
abstract = "Purpose: We wanted to determine whether additional breast ultrasound examinations are needed for patients who have clustered calcifications found by mammography for the detection of breast carcinomas. Methods: We performed targeted ultrasound examinations in 125 consecutive patients who had clustered calcifications found by mammography. Forty-eight pathologically proven patients with 61 breast lesions were included in this study (26 invasive carcinomas, 10 ductal carcinomas in situ and 25 benign diseases). Two breast radiologists evaluated the mammography and the ultrasound findings and they graded the probability of malignancy by consensus as follows: definitely benign 1, probably benign 2, probably malignant 3, and definitely malignant 4. The diagnostic performance values, including the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, for mammography and additional ultrasound were compared using McNemar's test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. On the ROC analysis, areas under the ROC curves (AUC) and 95{\%} confidence intervals (CI) were obtained. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for making the diagnosis of breast carcinoma by mammography were 88.9{\%}, 12.0{\%}, 57.4{\%}, 59.3{\%}, and 42.9{\%} and those for additional ultrasound were 94.4{\%}, 64.0{\%}, 82.0{\%}, 79.1{\%}, and 88.9{\%}, respectively. The differences of specificity and accuracy were statistically significant (p=0.0003). On the ROC analysis, ACU were significantly different between mammography (AUC=0.586, 95{\%} CI=0.453-0.711) and ultrasound (AUC=0.823, 95{\%} CI=0.704-0.909) (p=0.003). Clustered calcifications with associated masses or ductal changes on additional breast ultrasound had high frequency of malignancies, 79{\%} or 73{\%}. In addition, 87{\%} of malignant masses were invasive carcinomas and 45{\%} of malignant ductal changes were ductal carcinomas in situ. Conclusion: Additional breast ultrasound examinations for the lesions with clustered calcifications on mammography can improve the diagnostic performance and significantly contribute to the specificity and accuracy of a diagnosis of breast carcinoma. In addition, the ultrasound features may predict the pathologic findings such as benignity or malignancy and invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ.",
keywords = "Breast neoplasms, Calcification, Mammography, Ultrasonography",
author = "Hee, {Young Kim} and Seo, {Bo Kyoung} and Kim, {Hee Young} and Yie Ann and Kyu, {Ran Cho} and Hae, {Young Seol} and Cha, {Sang Hoon} and Baek, {Hyun Kim} and Son, {Gil Soo} and Jung, {Won Bae}",
year = "2009",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4048/jbc.2009.12.3.142",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "142--150",
journal = "Journal of Breast Cancer",
issn = "1738-6756",
publisher = "Korean Breast Cancer Society",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Additional breast ultrasound examinations in clustered calcifications

T2 - For improving diagnostic performance

AU - Hee, Young Kim

AU - Seo, Bo Kyoung

AU - Kim, Hee Young

AU - Ann, Yie

AU - Kyu, Ran Cho

AU - Hae, Young Seol

AU - Cha, Sang Hoon

AU - Baek, Hyun Kim

AU - Son, Gil Soo

AU - Jung, Won Bae

PY - 2009/9/1

Y1 - 2009/9/1

N2 - Purpose: We wanted to determine whether additional breast ultrasound examinations are needed for patients who have clustered calcifications found by mammography for the detection of breast carcinomas. Methods: We performed targeted ultrasound examinations in 125 consecutive patients who had clustered calcifications found by mammography. Forty-eight pathologically proven patients with 61 breast lesions were included in this study (26 invasive carcinomas, 10 ductal carcinomas in situ and 25 benign diseases). Two breast radiologists evaluated the mammography and the ultrasound findings and they graded the probability of malignancy by consensus as follows: definitely benign 1, probably benign 2, probably malignant 3, and definitely malignant 4. The diagnostic performance values, including the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, for mammography and additional ultrasound were compared using McNemar's test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. On the ROC analysis, areas under the ROC curves (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for making the diagnosis of breast carcinoma by mammography were 88.9%, 12.0%, 57.4%, 59.3%, and 42.9% and those for additional ultrasound were 94.4%, 64.0%, 82.0%, 79.1%, and 88.9%, respectively. The differences of specificity and accuracy were statistically significant (p=0.0003). On the ROC analysis, ACU were significantly different between mammography (AUC=0.586, 95% CI=0.453-0.711) and ultrasound (AUC=0.823, 95% CI=0.704-0.909) (p=0.003). Clustered calcifications with associated masses or ductal changes on additional breast ultrasound had high frequency of malignancies, 79% or 73%. In addition, 87% of malignant masses were invasive carcinomas and 45% of malignant ductal changes were ductal carcinomas in situ. Conclusion: Additional breast ultrasound examinations for the lesions with clustered calcifications on mammography can improve the diagnostic performance and significantly contribute to the specificity and accuracy of a diagnosis of breast carcinoma. In addition, the ultrasound features may predict the pathologic findings such as benignity or malignancy and invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ.

AB - Purpose: We wanted to determine whether additional breast ultrasound examinations are needed for patients who have clustered calcifications found by mammography for the detection of breast carcinomas. Methods: We performed targeted ultrasound examinations in 125 consecutive patients who had clustered calcifications found by mammography. Forty-eight pathologically proven patients with 61 breast lesions were included in this study (26 invasive carcinomas, 10 ductal carcinomas in situ and 25 benign diseases). Two breast radiologists evaluated the mammography and the ultrasound findings and they graded the probability of malignancy by consensus as follows: definitely benign 1, probably benign 2, probably malignant 3, and definitely malignant 4. The diagnostic performance values, including the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, for mammography and additional ultrasound were compared using McNemar's test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. On the ROC analysis, areas under the ROC curves (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for making the diagnosis of breast carcinoma by mammography were 88.9%, 12.0%, 57.4%, 59.3%, and 42.9% and those for additional ultrasound were 94.4%, 64.0%, 82.0%, 79.1%, and 88.9%, respectively. The differences of specificity and accuracy were statistically significant (p=0.0003). On the ROC analysis, ACU were significantly different between mammography (AUC=0.586, 95% CI=0.453-0.711) and ultrasound (AUC=0.823, 95% CI=0.704-0.909) (p=0.003). Clustered calcifications with associated masses or ductal changes on additional breast ultrasound had high frequency of malignancies, 79% or 73%. In addition, 87% of malignant masses were invasive carcinomas and 45% of malignant ductal changes were ductal carcinomas in situ. Conclusion: Additional breast ultrasound examinations for the lesions with clustered calcifications on mammography can improve the diagnostic performance and significantly contribute to the specificity and accuracy of a diagnosis of breast carcinoma. In addition, the ultrasound features may predict the pathologic findings such as benignity or malignancy and invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ.

KW - Breast neoplasms

KW - Calcification

KW - Mammography

KW - Ultrasonography

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350681152&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350681152&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4048/jbc.2009.12.3.142

DO - 10.4048/jbc.2009.12.3.142

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 142

EP - 150

JO - Journal of Breast Cancer

JF - Journal of Breast Cancer

SN - 1738-6756

IS - 3

ER -