False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses
Mammography and ultrasound are often used concurrently for patients with palpable breast masses. While mammography has a false-negative rate of approximately 15 %, the addition of breast ultrasound decreases this rate among patients with palpable breast masses. There are no recent outcome data regar...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Breast cancer research and treatment 2015-10, Vol.153 (3), p.699-702 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 702 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 699 |
container_title | Breast cancer research and treatment |
container_volume | 153 |
creator | Chan, Carlos H. F. Coopey, Suzanne B. Freer, Phoebe E. Hughes, Kevin S. |
description | Mammography and ultrasound are often used concurrently for patients with palpable breast masses. While mammography has a false-negative rate of approximately 15 %, the addition of breast ultrasound decreases this rate among patients with palpable breast masses. There are no recent outcome data regarding the use of combined reporting of ultrasound and mammography (CRUM) for palpable breast masses. In this study, female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were retrospectively reviewed in a prospectively entered database at a single institution from June 2010 to July 2013. All cancer cases and false-negative cases using CRUM were identified. Cancer rates, false-negative rates, and negative predictive values were calculated based on CRUM breast imaging-reporting and data system (BI-RADS) categories. One thousand two hundreds and twelve female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were identified; 77 % of patients had CRUM and 73 % (682/932) were BI-RADS 1–2. Despite negative or benign BI-RADS, 9.5 % of patients with BI-RADS 1–2 (65/682) underwent biopsy, compared to 96 % of patients with a BI-RADS 4–5 designation. Eighty-one patients were found to have cancers; 2 had BI-RADS 1–2 imaging. The false-negative rate of CRUM was 2.4 % (2/81). Since 69 % (428/617) of BI-RADS 1–2 patients without tissue diagnosis had follow-up imaging and/or clinical exam (median: 27 months, range: 2–62 months) and none developed cancers, the cancer rate and negative predictive value of a palpable breast mass of BI-RADS 1–2 were estimated to be 0.3 % (2/682) and 99.7 %, respectively. In the modern era of combined imaging for breast masses, a patient with a low suspicion exam can be reassured with a negative CRUM report. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10549-015-3557-2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1768569154</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A430429785</galeid><sourcerecordid>A430429785</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-d01cdf14ba2b55df685c00fc23a9cdb9830812c0e7205186a685f8b2cb1202bd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNktFv1SAYxYnRuOv0D_DFkJgYXzo_aCnlcVmcM1niiz4j0I97u7RwhXbL_ntp7nSb0cTwAIHfOXDIIeQ1gxMGID9kBqJRFTBR1ULIij8hGyZkXUnO5FOyAdbKqu2gPSIvcr4CACVBPSdHvK0bJgVsyPdzM2asAm7NPFwjTWZGGj11cbJDwJ5OZpriNpn97paa0NNlnJPJcSlLHxO9iRMGejPMO7o3497YEalNaPJclDljfkme-fWKV3fzMfl2_vHr2UV1-eXT57PTy8qVB89VD8z1njXWcCtE79tOOADveG2U663qaugYd4CSg2BdawrgO8udZRy47etj8v7gu0_xx4J51tOQHY6jCRiXrJksilYx0fwHyjoFteSqoG__QK_ikkIJslJStYUT99TWjKiH4GP5I7ea6tOmhoYr2a3UyV-oMnqcBhcD-qHsPxK8eyDYoRnnXY7jMg8x5McgO4AuxZwTer1Pw2TSrWag16boQ1N0aYpem6J50by5S7bYCfvfil_VKAA_ALkchS2mB9H_6foTDiTF7w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1717969035</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Chan, Carlos H. F. ; Coopey, Suzanne B. ; Freer, Phoebe E. ; Hughes, Kevin S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Chan, Carlos H. F. ; Coopey, Suzanne B. ; Freer, Phoebe E. ; Hughes, Kevin S.</creatorcontrib><description>Mammography and ultrasound are often used concurrently for patients with palpable breast masses. While mammography has a false-negative rate of approximately 15 %, the addition of breast ultrasound decreases this rate among patients with palpable breast masses. There are no recent outcome data regarding the use of combined reporting of ultrasound and mammography (CRUM) for palpable breast masses. In this study, female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were retrospectively reviewed in a prospectively entered database at a single institution from June 2010 to July 2013. All cancer cases and false-negative cases using CRUM were identified. Cancer rates, false-negative rates, and negative predictive values were calculated based on CRUM breast imaging-reporting and data system (BI-RADS) categories. One thousand two hundreds and twelve female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were identified; 77 % of patients had CRUM and 73 % (682/932) were BI-RADS 1–2. Despite negative or benign BI-RADS, 9.5 % of patients with BI-RADS 1–2 (65/682) underwent biopsy, compared to 96 % of patients with a BI-RADS 4–5 designation. Eighty-one patients were found to have cancers; 2 had BI-RADS 1–2 imaging. The false-negative rate of CRUM was 2.4 % (2/81). Since 69 % (428/617) of BI-RADS 1–2 patients without tissue diagnosis had follow-up imaging and/or clinical exam (median: 27 months, range: 2–62 months) and none developed cancers, the cancer rate and negative predictive value of a palpable breast mass of BI-RADS 1–2 were estimated to be 0.3 % (2/682) and 99.7 %, respectively. In the modern era of combined imaging for breast masses, a patient with a low suspicion exam can be reassured with a negative CRUM report.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-6806</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7217</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10549-015-3557-2</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26341750</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BCTRD6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biopsy ; Breast - pathology ; Breast cancer ; Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Breast Neoplasms - pathology ; Breast Neoplasms - surgery ; Brief Report ; Cancer research ; Databases, Factual ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Mammography ; Medical diagnosis ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Oncology ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Ultrasonic imaging ; Ultrasonography, Mammary ; Women ; Women's health ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Breast cancer research and treatment, 2015-10, Vol.153 (3), p.699-702</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 Springer</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-d01cdf14ba2b55df685c00fc23a9cdb9830812c0e7205186a685f8b2cb1202bd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-d01cdf14ba2b55df685c00fc23a9cdb9830812c0e7205186a685f8b2cb1202bd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10549-015-3557-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10549-015-3557-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26341750$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chan, Carlos H. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coopey, Suzanne B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freer, Phoebe E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hughes, Kevin S.</creatorcontrib><title>False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses</title><title>Breast cancer research and treatment</title><addtitle>Breast Cancer Res Treat</addtitle><addtitle>Breast Cancer Res Treat</addtitle><description>Mammography and ultrasound are often used concurrently for patients with palpable breast masses. While mammography has a false-negative rate of approximately 15 %, the addition of breast ultrasound decreases this rate among patients with palpable breast masses. There are no recent outcome data regarding the use of combined reporting of ultrasound and mammography (CRUM) for palpable breast masses. In this study, female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were retrospectively reviewed in a prospectively entered database at a single institution from June 2010 to July 2013. All cancer cases and false-negative cases using CRUM were identified. Cancer rates, false-negative rates, and negative predictive values were calculated based on CRUM breast imaging-reporting and data system (BI-RADS) categories. One thousand two hundreds and twelve female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were identified; 77 % of patients had CRUM and 73 % (682/932) were BI-RADS 1–2. Despite negative or benign BI-RADS, 9.5 % of patients with BI-RADS 1–2 (65/682) underwent biopsy, compared to 96 % of patients with a BI-RADS 4–5 designation. Eighty-one patients were found to have cancers; 2 had BI-RADS 1–2 imaging. The false-negative rate of CRUM was 2.4 % (2/81). Since 69 % (428/617) of BI-RADS 1–2 patients without tissue diagnosis had follow-up imaging and/or clinical exam (median: 27 months, range: 2–62 months) and none developed cancers, the cancer rate and negative predictive value of a palpable breast mass of BI-RADS 1–2 were estimated to be 0.3 % (2/682) and 99.7 %, respectively. In the modern era of combined imaging for breast masses, a patient with a low suspicion exam can be reassured with a negative CRUM report.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>Breast - pathology</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Brief Report</subject><subject>Cancer research</subject><subject>Databases, Factual</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Mammography</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Ultrasonic imaging</subject><subject>Ultrasonography, Mammary</subject><subject>Women</subject><subject>Women's health</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0167-6806</issn><issn>1573-7217</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNktFv1SAYxYnRuOv0D_DFkJgYXzo_aCnlcVmcM1niiz4j0I97u7RwhXbL_ntp7nSb0cTwAIHfOXDIIeQ1gxMGID9kBqJRFTBR1ULIij8hGyZkXUnO5FOyAdbKqu2gPSIvcr4CACVBPSdHvK0bJgVsyPdzM2asAm7NPFwjTWZGGj11cbJDwJ5OZpriNpn97paa0NNlnJPJcSlLHxO9iRMGejPMO7o3497YEalNaPJclDljfkme-fWKV3fzMfl2_vHr2UV1-eXT57PTy8qVB89VD8z1njXWcCtE79tOOADveG2U663qaugYd4CSg2BdawrgO8udZRy47etj8v7gu0_xx4J51tOQHY6jCRiXrJksilYx0fwHyjoFteSqoG__QK_ikkIJslJStYUT99TWjKiH4GP5I7ea6tOmhoYr2a3UyV-oMnqcBhcD-qHsPxK8eyDYoRnnXY7jMg8x5McgO4AuxZwTer1Pw2TSrWag16boQ1N0aYpem6J50by5S7bYCfvfil_VKAA_ALkchS2mB9H_6foTDiTF7w</recordid><startdate>20151001</startdate><enddate>20151001</enddate><creator>Chan, Carlos H. F.</creator><creator>Coopey, Suzanne B.</creator><creator>Freer, Phoebe E.</creator><creator>Hughes, Kevin S.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151001</creationdate><title>False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses</title><author>Chan, Carlos H. F. ; Coopey, Suzanne B. ; Freer, Phoebe E. ; Hughes, Kevin S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c573t-d01cdf14ba2b55df685c00fc23a9cdb9830812c0e7205186a685f8b2cb1202bd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>Breast - pathology</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Brief Report</topic><topic>Cancer research</topic><topic>Databases, Factual</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Mammography</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Ultrasonic imaging</topic><topic>Ultrasonography, Mammary</topic><topic>Women</topic><topic>Women's health</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chan, Carlos H. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coopey, Suzanne B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freer, Phoebe E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hughes, Kevin S.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Breast cancer research and treatment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chan, Carlos H. F.</au><au>Coopey, Suzanne B.</au><au>Freer, Phoebe E.</au><au>Hughes, Kevin S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses</atitle><jtitle>Breast cancer research and treatment</jtitle><stitle>Breast Cancer Res Treat</stitle><addtitle>Breast Cancer Res Treat</addtitle><date>2015-10-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>153</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>699</spage><epage>702</epage><pages>699-702</pages><issn>0167-6806</issn><eissn>1573-7217</eissn><coden>BCTRD6</coden><abstract>Mammography and ultrasound are often used concurrently for patients with palpable breast masses. While mammography has a false-negative rate of approximately 15 %, the addition of breast ultrasound decreases this rate among patients with palpable breast masses. There are no recent outcome data regarding the use of combined reporting of ultrasound and mammography (CRUM) for palpable breast masses. In this study, female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were retrospectively reviewed in a prospectively entered database at a single institution from June 2010 to July 2013. All cancer cases and false-negative cases using CRUM were identified. Cancer rates, false-negative rates, and negative predictive values were calculated based on CRUM breast imaging-reporting and data system (BI-RADS) categories. One thousand two hundreds and twelve female patients presenting with a palpable breast mass were identified; 77 % of patients had CRUM and 73 % (682/932) were BI-RADS 1–2. Despite negative or benign BI-RADS, 9.5 % of patients with BI-RADS 1–2 (65/682) underwent biopsy, compared to 96 % of patients with a BI-RADS 4–5 designation. Eighty-one patients were found to have cancers; 2 had BI-RADS 1–2 imaging. The false-negative rate of CRUM was 2.4 % (2/81). Since 69 % (428/617) of BI-RADS 1–2 patients without tissue diagnosis had follow-up imaging and/or clinical exam (median: 27 months, range: 2–62 months) and none developed cancers, the cancer rate and negative predictive value of a palpable breast mass of BI-RADS 1–2 were estimated to be 0.3 % (2/682) and 99.7 %, respectively. In the modern era of combined imaging for breast masses, a patient with a low suspicion exam can be reassured with a negative CRUM report.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>26341750</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10549-015-3557-2</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0167-6806 |
ispartof | Breast cancer research and treatment, 2015-10, Vol.153 (3), p.699-702 |
issn | 0167-6806 1573-7217 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1768569154 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Biopsy Breast - pathology Breast cancer Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis Breast Neoplasms - pathology Breast Neoplasms - surgery Brief Report Cancer research Databases, Factual Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Mammography Medical diagnosis Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Oncology Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Ultrasonic imaging Ultrasonography, Mammary Women Women's health Young Adult |
title | False-negative rate of combined mammography and ultrasound for women with palpable breast masses |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T19%3A36%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=False-negative%20rate%20of%20combined%20mammography%20and%20ultrasound%20for%20women%20with%20palpable%20breast%20masses&rft.jtitle=Breast%20cancer%20research%20and%20treatment&rft.au=Chan,%20Carlos%20H.%20F.&rft.date=2015-10-01&rft.volume=153&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=699&rft.epage=702&rft.pages=699-702&rft.issn=0167-6806&rft.eissn=1573-7217&rft.coden=BCTRD6&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10549-015-3557-2&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA430429785%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1717969035&rft_id=info:pmid/26341750&rft_galeid=A430429785&rfr_iscdi=true |