Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Mammographically detected spicules associated with malignant breast tumors frequently harbor additional tumor foci Cover

Mammographically detected spicules associated with malignant breast tumors frequently harbor additional tumor foci

Open Access
|Jun 2025

References

  1. Holland R, Veling SH, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH. Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1-2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer 1985; 56: 979-90. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19850901)56:5<;979::aid-cncr2820560502>3.0.co;2-n
  2. Franquet T, De Miguel C, Cozcolluela R, Donoso L. Spiculated lesions of the breast: mammographic-pathologic correlation. RadioGraphics 1993; 13: 841-52. doi: 10.1148/radiographics.13.4.8356272
  3. Moriuchi H, Yamaguchi J, Hayashi H, Ohtani H, Shimokawa I, Abiru H, et al. Cancer cell interaction with adipose tissue: Correlation with the finding of spiculation at mammography. Radiology 2016; 279: 56-64. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015142191
  4. Lengyel E, Makowski L, DiGiovanni J, Kolonin MG. Cancer as a matter of fat: The crosstalk between adipose tissue and tumors. Trends Cancer 2018; 4: 374-84. doi: 10.1016/j.trecan.2018.03.004
  5. Wu Y, Li X, Li Q, Cheng C, Zheng L. Adipose tissue-to-breast cancer crosstalk: Comprehensive insights. Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer 2022; 1877: 188800. doi: 10.1016/j.bbcan.2022.188800
  6. Motrescu ER, Rio MC. Cancer cells, adipocytes and matrix metalloproteinase 11: a vicious tumor progression cycle. Biol Chem 2008; 389: 1037-41. doi: 10.1515/BC.2008.110
  7. Kaushik S, Pickup MW, Weaver VM. From transformation to metastasis: deconstructing the extracellular matrix in breast cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev 2016; 35: 655-67. doi: 10.1007/s10555-016-9650-0
  8. Samaržija K, Jurjević Z. Association of the imaging characteristics of desmoplasia on digital breast tomosynthesis and the Ki-67 proliferation index in invasive breast cancer. Croat Med J 2021; 62: 59-67. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2021.62.59
  9. Demirkazık FB, Gülsün M, Fırat P. Mammographic features of nonpalpable spiculated lesions. Clinical Imaging 2003; 27: 293-7. doi: 10.1016/S0899-7071(02)00566-1
  10. Almasarweh S, Sudah M, Okuma H, Joukainen S, Kärjä V, Vanninen R, et al. Diagnostic performance of tomosynthesis, digital mammography and a dedicated digital specimen radiography system versus pathological assessment of excised breast lesions. Radiol Oncol 2022; 56: 461-70. doi: 10.2478/raon-2022-0036
  11. Almasarweh S, Sudah M, Okuma H, Joukainen S, Vanninen R, Masarwah A. Specimen tomosynthesis provides no additional value to specimen ultrasound in ultrasound-visible malignant breast lesions. Scand J Surg 2024; 113: 237-45. doi: 10.1177/14574969241233435
  12. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ. Strategies for subtypes--dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1736-47. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdr304
  13. American College of Radiology, D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA, eds. ACR BI-RADS Atlas: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System ; Mammography, Ultrasound, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Follow-up and Outcome Monitoring, Data Dictionary. 5th edition. ACR, American College of Radiology; 2013.
  14. Udovicic M, Bazdaric K, Bilic-Zulle L, Petrovecki M. What we need to know when calculating the coefficient of correlation? Biochem Med. 2007: 17: 10-15. doi: 10.11613/BM.2007.002
  15. Dalberg K, Azavedo E, Svane G, Sandelin K. Mammographic features, predictors of early ipsilateral breast tumour recurrences? Eur J Surg Oncol 1996; 22: 483-90. doi: 10.1016/S0748-7983(96)92882-6
  16. Rong XC, Kang YH, Shi GF, Ren JL, Liu YH, Li ZG, et al. The use of mammography-based radiomics nomograms for the preoperative prediction of the histological grade of invasive ductal carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2023; 149: 11635-45. doi: 10.1007/s00432-023-05001-9
  17. Lamb PM, Perry NM, Vinnicombe SJ, Wells CA. Correlation between ultrasound characteristics, mammographic findings and histological grade in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol 2000; 55: 40-4. doi: 10.1053/crad.1999.0333
  18. Tabar L, Tony Chen HH, Amy Yen MF, Tot T, Tung TH, Chen LS, et al. Mammographic tumor features can predict long-term outcomes reliably in women with 1-14-mm invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 101: 1745-59. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20582
  19. Landercasper J, Borgert AJ, Fayanju OM, Cody H 3rd, Feldman S, Greenberg C, et al. Factors associated with reoperation in breast-conserving surgery for cancer: A prospective study of American Society of Breast Surgeon members. Ann Surg Oncol 2019; 26: 3321-36. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07547-w
  20. McEvoy MP, Landercasper J, Naik HR, Feldman S. Update of the American Society of Breast Surgeons Toolbox to address the lumpectomy reoperation epidemic. Gland Surg 2018; 7: 536-53. doi: 10.21037/gs.2018.11.03
  21. Niinikoski L, Leidenius MHK, Vaara P, Voynov A, Heikkilä P, Mattson J, et al. Resection margins and local recurrences in breast cancer: Comparison between conventional and oncoplastic breast conserving surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol 2019; 45: 976-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.02.010
  22. Lepomäki M, Karhunen-Enckell U, Tuominen J, Kronqvist P, Oksala N, Murtola T, et al. Tumor margins that lead to reoperation in breast cancer: A retrospective register study of 4,489 patients. J Surg Oncol 2022; 125: 577-88. doi: 10.1002/jso.26749
  23. Joukainen S, Laaksonen E, Vanninen R, Kaarela O, Sudah M. Dual-layer rotation: A versatile therapeutic mammoplasty technique. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29: 6716-27. doi: 10.1245/s10434-022-11977-4
  24. Sturesdotter L, Sandsveden M, Johnson K, Larsson AM, Zackrisson S, Sartor H. Mammographic tumour appearance is related to clinicopathological factors and surrogate molecular breast cancer subtype. Sci Rep 2020; 10: 20814. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-77053-7
  25. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, James JJ, Ellis IO, Cornford E. Is Mammographic spiculation an independent, good prognostic factor in screening-detected invasive breast cancer? Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187: 1377-80. doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.0725
  26. Ciatto S, Morrone D, Catarzi S, Bonardi R. Breast cancer: reliability of mammographic appearance as a predictor of hormone receptor status. Radiology 1992; 182: 805-8. doi: 10.1148/radiology.182.3.1311118
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2025-0041 | Journal eISSN: 1581-3207 | Journal ISSN: 1318-2099
Language: English
Page range: 168 - 175
Submitted on: Dec 19, 2024
|
Accepted on: Apr 7, 2025
|
Published on: Jun 21, 2025
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2025 Heli Tuomainen, Mazen Sudah, Sarianna Joukainen, Vesa Kärjä, Amro Masarwah, Otto Jokelainen, Hidemi Okuma, published by Association of Radiology and Oncology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.