This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Peintinger, F. Articles by Symmans, W. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Peintinger, F. Articles by Symmans, W. F.

Accuracy of the Combination of Mammography and Sonography in Predicting Tumor Response in Breast Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

¹ Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 444, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
² Department of Pathology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 85, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
³ Department of Biostatistics and Applied Mathematics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 447, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
⁴ Department of Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 1354, Houston, Texas 77030, USA
⁵ Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 1354, Houston, Texas 77030, USA

Correspondence: Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Henry M. Kuerer, MD, PhD; E-mail: hkuerer{at}mdanderson.org

Background: Residual tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an important consideration in surgical planning. We examined the accuracy of the combination of mammography and sonography in predicting pathologic residual tumor size.

Methods: Tumor size was evaluated by physical examination, mammography, and sonography at diagnosis and before surgery in 162 breast cancer patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Agreement between the predicted and the pathologic responses and the predicted and the pathologic tumor sizes was calculated. The effect of invasive lobular carcinoma, high nuclear grade, hormone receptor positivity, and the presence of an extensive intraductal component on the accuracy of mammography and sonography in predicting pathologic residual tumor size was analyzed.

Results: Forty-two patients (25.9%) had a pathologic complete response (pCR). Overall agreement between predicted and pathologic responses was 53% for physical examination, 67% for mammography plus sonography, and 63% for physical examination plus mammography and sonography. The sensitivity of mammography and sonography in predicting pCR was 78.6%, and the specificity was 92.5%; the accuracy was 88.9%. Residual tumor size determined by mammography and sonography correlated with pathologic residual tumor size (r = .662); pathologic tumor size was within .5 cm of predicted in 69.1% of patients. Multivariate analysis showed that pathologic residual tumor size was underestimated for lobular carcinoma and overestimated for poorly differentiated tumors.

Conclusions: The combination of mammography and sonography has a high accuracy in predicting pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Agreement of residual tumor size in mammography and sonography with pathologic residual tumor size was moderate.

Key Words: Mammography • Sonography • Breast cancer • Neoadjuvant chemotherapy

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Kaufmann, G. von Minckwitz, H. D. Bear, A. Buzdar, P. McGale, H. Bonnefoi, M. Colleoni, C. Denkert, W. Eiermann, R. Jackesz, et al. Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: new perspectives 2006 Ann. Onc., December 1, 2007; 18(12): 1927 - 1934. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]