Relationship among mammographic findings with histopathologic type of breast cancer and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in young women
Keywords:
Calcification, Breast, Neoplasm, Mammography, Pathology, ERBB2 protein, UltrasonographyAbstract
Introduction: Radiological measures to diagnose breast cancer, including mammographic and ultrasound assessments in young women, are associated with restrictions affecting the use of this tool. No adequate information is available on mammography view in young people with breast cancer and its relationship with pathologic type and epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) as a prognostic marker, especially in the Iranian race. This study was conducted to examine the relationship between mammographic findings of young women with breast cancer with diagnosed histopathologic type and HER2 marker status.
Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study was carried out on women with breast cancer referred to Omid Hospital in Mashhad, Iran. Inclusion criteria were age less than 45 years and definitive diagnosis of breast cancer documented in the patient record. Information on mammographic findings such as mass, asymmetry, microcalcification, tissue distortion, nipple retraction, and skin thickening was collected from patient medical records. In addition, the type of pathology diagnosed based on biopsy samples and HER2 examination results were collected. The chi-square test and SPSS software were used to analyze the relationship among qualitative variables.
Results: This study was performed on 153 patients with a mean age of 39.3±2.5 years (minimum 20 years and maximum 45 years). The mammographic finding was reported normal in 41 patients (26.7%). The evidence of malignant mass was observed in 48 patients (31.3%). The microcalcification was found in 31 patients (20.3%). The retraction or thickening of breast tissue was seen in 39 patients (25.5%). The distortion of breast stroma was found in 41 patients (26.8%). The HER2 marker in 76 patients (49.7%) was positive in study subjects. There was no statistically significant association between mammographic findings and pathologic type. Among the mammographic findings, only the presence of microcalcification had significant association with HER2 results (p=0.008).
Conclusion: It seems that a significant relationship could not be found between mammographic features in patients with breast cancer and type of pathology diagnosed. However, the presence of calcification in mammography is associated with positive HER2.
References
Parsa Y, Mirmalek SA, Ka
ni FE, Aidun A, Salimi
-
Tabatabaee SA, Yadollah
-
Damavandi S, et al. A Review
of the Clinical Implications of Breast Cancer Biology. Electronic Physician. 2016; 8(5): 2416. doi:
19082/2416, PMid: 27382453, PMCid: PMC4930263.
Mehrabi E, Hajian S, Simbar M,
Hoshyari M, Zayeri F. Coping response following a diagnosis of breast
cancer: A systematic review. Electronic physician. 2015; 7(8): 1575. doi: 10.19082/1575, PMid: 26816583,
PMCid: PMC4725409.
Reyna C, Lee MC. Breast cancer in young women: special consi
derations in multidisciplinary care. Journal
of multidisciplinary healthcare. 2014; 7: 419
-
, PMid: 25300196, PMCid: PMC4189712.
Mousavi SM, Montazeri A, Mohagheghi MA, Jarrahi AM, Harirchi I, Najafi M, et al. Breast cancer in Iran:
an epidemiological re
view. The breast journal. 2007; 13(4): 383
-
doi: 10.1111/j.1524
-
2007.00446.x, PMid: 17593043.
Harirchi I, Ebrahimi M, Zamani N, Jarvandi S, Montazeri A. Breast cancer in Iran: a review of 903 case
records. Public health. 2000; 114(2): 143
-
doi:
1038/sj.ph.1900623.
Montazeri A, Vahdaninia M, Harirchi I, Harirchi AM, Sajadian A, Khaleghi F, et al. Breast cancer in Iran:
need for greater women awareness of warning signs and effective screening methods. Asia Pacific Family
Medicine. 2008; 7(1): 1
. doi: 10.1186/1447
-
X
-
-
, PMid: 19099595, PMCid: PMC2628874.
Harirchi I, Kolahdoozan S, Karbakhsh M, Chegini N, Mohseni S, Montazeri A, et al. Twenty years of
breast cancer in Iran: downstaging without a formal screening program. Annals of oncology. 20
; 22(1):
-
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq303, PMid: 20534622.
Green BB, Taplin SH. Breast cancer screening controversies. The Journal of the American Board of Family
Practice. 2003; 16(3): 233
-
doi: 10.3122/jabfm.16.3.233.
Feig SA, D'Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE
, Jackson V, Kopans DB, Monsees B, et al. American College of
Radiology guidelines for breast cancer screening. AJR American journal of roentgenology. 1998; 171(1):
-
doi: 10.2214/ajr.171.1.9648758, PMid: 9648758.
Force UPST. Screening for breast canc
er: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
Annals of internal medicine. 2009; 151(10): 716. doi: 10.7326/0003
-
-
-
-
-
,
PMid: 19920272.
Elmore JG, Armstrong K, Lehman CD, Fletcher SW. Screening for breast cancer. Jam
a. 2005; 293(10):
-
doi: 10.1001/jama.293.10.1245, PMid: 15755947, PMCid: PMC3149836.
Rauscher GH, Johnson TP, Cho YI, Walk JA. Accuracy of self
-
reported cancer
-
screening histories: a meta
-
analysis. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 2008;
(4): 748
-
doi: 10.1158/1055
-
EPI
-
-
, PMid: 18381468.
Jafarzadeh N, Ashraf H, Khoshroo F, Shamloo AS, Bidouei F, Ghaffarzadehgan K. Triple Negative Breast
Cancer: Molecular Classification, Prognostic Markers and Targeted Therapies. Razavi Int
ernational Journal
of Medicine. 2015; 3(2): 1
-
doi: 10.5812/rijm.3(2)2015.24992.
Aalipour E, Jangholi E. Prognosis and Predictive Factors Related to Breast Cancer. Galen Medical Journal.
; 5(2): 45
-
Mirmalek SA, Elhamkani F, Tabatabaee SAS, Mahmood
zadeh H, Parsa Y, Yadollah
-
Damavandi S, et al.
Introduction of HER
-
and a short review on its role in prognosis and treatment of breast cancer. Galen
Medical Journal. 2014; 3(3): 132
-
Radenkovic S, Konjevic G, Isakovic A, Stevanovic P, Gopcevic K, Juri
sic V. HER2
-
positive breast cancer
patients: correlation between mammographic and pathological findings. Radiation protection dosimetry.
: ncu243. doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncu243, PMid: 25063784.
Harirchi I, Karbakhsh M, Kashefi A, Momtahen AJ. Breast cancer i
n Iran: results of a multi
-
center study.
Asian pacific journal of cancer prevention. 2004; 5(1): 24
-
, PMid: 15075000.
Vahdaninia M, Montazeri A. Breast cancer in Iran: a survival analysis. Asian pacific journal of cancer
prevention. 2004; 5(2): 223
-
, PMi
d: 15244529.
Li C, Uribe D, Daling J. Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer. British
journal of cancer. 2005; 93(9): 1046
-
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602787, PMid: 16175185, PMCid:
PMC2361680.
Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y
, Xu J, Murray T, et al. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA: a cancer journal for
clinicians. 2008; 58(2): 71
-
doi: 10.3322/ca.2007.0010.
Moradi MM HF, Shamsian AA, Eftekharzade MI, Hedayati
-
Moghadam MR, Bidkhori HR, et al.
[Relationship between oncogen HER
-
,
P53, estrogen and progesterone receptor status with survival Rate
in Iranian women with breast cancer]. Iran J Breast Dis 2009; 1: 7
-
Mofid B JNM, Kiani L, Zaeri F. [Evaluate the Relationship between oncogen HER
-
With Prognostic
Factors in Breast Can
cer, research in Medical Sciences]. Iran J Breast Dis 2009; 28: 29
-
Sirati F GA, Alavi N. [Determine the prevalence of prognostic factors (ER, PR, P53, HER
-
/neu) in Breast
Cancer and investigate their relationship with each other and with the patient's
age and menopausal status].
Iran J Breast Dis 2009; 1: 24
-
Kadivar M RM, Jadidfard R. [Evaluation of histopathology and biologic markers in premenopausal (under
years) and postmenopausal (over 60 years) women with breast cancer in Hazrat
-
e
-
Rasoul a
nd Atieh
hospital]. Journal of Iran University of Medical Sciences. 2010; 17: 49
-
Huang H
-
J, Neven P, Drijkoningen M, Paridaens R, Wildiers H, Van Limbergen E, et al. Association
between HER
-
/neu and the progesterone receptor in oestrogen
-
dependent br
east cancer is age
-
related.
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2005; 91(1): 81
-
doi: 10.1007/s10549
-
-
-
, PMid:
Bauer KR, Brown M, Cress RD, Parise CA, Caggiano V. Des
criptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)
‐
negative, progesterone receptor (PR)
‐
negative, and HER2
‐
negative invasive breast cancer, the so
‐
called triple
‐
negative phenotype. Cancer. 2007; 109(9): 1721
-
doi: 10.1002/cncr.22618, PMid:
Carey LA, P
erou CM, Livasy CA, Dressler LG, Cowan D, Conway K, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes,
and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. Jama. 2006; 295(21): 2492
-
doi:
1001/jama.295.21.2492, PMid: 16757721.
Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaff
e M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, et al. Diagnostic performance of
digital versus film mammography for breast
-
cancer screening. New England Journal of Medicine. 2005;
(17): 1773
-
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa052911, PMid: 16169887.
Keyhanian sAJa, Lohrasbi Z, Fotoukia
n E, Saravi Z, Mansour M. Evaluation of Biologic Markers
Frequency and Their Correlation with Some Determinant Prognostic Factors in Women with Breast Cancer
Referred to Oncology Clinic of Imam Sajjad Hospital of Ramsar during 2002
-
Journal of Ilam
Un
iversity of Medical Sciences. 2015; 22(7): 115
-
Foulkes WD. Clinically relevant biology of hereditary breast cancer. Seminars in Oncology. 2007; 34(5):
-
doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2007.07.010, PMid: 17920891.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 KNOWLEDGE KINGDOM PUBLISHING
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
