Advertisement

Mammographic Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

  • Evangelia C. Panourgias
Chapter

Abstract

Early diagnosis of breast cancer and successful treatment have resulted in a significant decrease in death from breast cancer. For a screening test to be effective, it should lead to an earlier diagnosis, in the case of mammography, of breast cancer. The end result of primary or secondary prevention is to reduce mortality from the disease. Finding a cancer earlier may not always benefit the patient. Some women may be diagnosed with metastatic disease but have such small primary tumors that they are hard to detect even pathologically. On the other end of the spectrum, autopsy studies have shown that some women who died from other causes were incidentally diagnosed with breast cancer, postmortem.

References

  1. 1.
    Tabár L, Vitak B, Chen TH, Yen AM, Cohen A, Tot T, Chiu SY, Chen SL, Fann JC, Rosell J, Fohlin H, Smith RA, Duffy SW (2011) Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. Radiology 260(3):658–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cady B, Michaelson JS (2001) The life-sparing potential of mammographic screening. Cancer 1(9):1699–1703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shen N, Hammonds LS, Madsen D, Dale P (2011) Mammography in 40-year-old women: what difference does it make? The potential impact of the U.S. preventative services task force (USPSTF) mammography guidelines. Ann Surg Oncol 18(11):3066–3071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cole EB, Zhang Z, Marques HS, Nishikawa RM, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, Padungchaichote W, Kuzmiak C, Chayakulkheeree J, Conant EF, Fajardo LL, Baum J, Gatsonis C, Pisano E (2012) Assessing the stand-alone sensitivity of computer-aided detection with cancer cases from the digital mammographic imaging screening trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199(3):W392–W401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee KA, Zuley ML, Chivukula M, Choksi ND, Ganott MA, Sumkin JH (2012) Original research: risk of malignancy when microscopic radial scars and microscopic papillomas are found at percutaneous biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:141–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Swann CA, Kopans DB, Koerner FC, McCarthy KA, White G, Hall DA (1987) The halo sign and malignant breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 149(6):1145–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mitnick JS, Vazquez MF, Harris MN, Roses DF (1989) Differentiation of radial scar from scirrhous carcinoma of the breast: mammographic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 173:697–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thomas DB, Whitehead J, Dorse C, Threatt BA, Gilbert FI Jr, Present AJ, Carlile T (1993) Mammographic calcifications and risk of subsequent breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(3):230–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yamada T, Mori N, Watanabe M, Kimijima I, Okumoto T, Seiji K, Takahashi S (2010) Radiologic-pathologic correlation of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics 30(5):1183–1198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bent CK, Bassett LW, D’ Orsi CJ, Sayre JW (2010) The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194(5):1378–1383CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evangelia C. Panourgias
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyAreteion Hospital, University of Athens, Medical SchoolAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations