Comparing preoperative imaging modalities in patient selection for breast intraoperative radiotherapy

Michael May, Christine Chin, Sitara Hirji, David Horowitz, Hannah Bansil, Sheldon M. Feldman, Richard Ha, Eileen P. Connolly

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: This study evaluated the relative accuracy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting the tumor size of early stage breast tumors in preoperative selection of patients for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). Methods: We identified 156 patients with clinical T1/T2, N0 breast cancer who underwent IORT. Clinical, pathologic, and radiation data were collected. The preoperative tumor size obtained by imaging was compared with tumor pathological size. Results: The median patient age was 66. The mean tumor size at excision was 1.05 cm (0.1-3.0 cm). Out of the 156 patients, 98 had a reported, nonzero tumor size by mammography, 131 by ultrasound, and 76 by MRI. The mean difference between imaging and the tumor size was +0.062 ± 0.54 cm for mammography, −0.11 ± 0.43 cm for ultrasound, and +0.33 ± 0.55 cm for MRI, with positive values indicating an overestimate of the tumor size. MRI produced more overestimates of tumor size of at least 0.5 cm than mammography or ultrasound in a paired analysis of patients who received both modalities. Conclusions: Accuracy of imaging modalities in determining tumor size can influence patients’ eligibility for IORT. Mammography and ultrasound showed acceptable accuracy in predicting size. MRI overestimated tumor size and may inappropriately exclude patients from IORT. We would discourage ruling out candidates for IORT on the basis of large size by MRI alone.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)959-965
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Surgical Oncology
Volume118
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2018

Fingerprint

Patient Selection
Breast
Radiotherapy
Mammary Ultrasonography
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Neoplasms
Breast Neoplasms
Mammography
Radiation

Keywords

  • breast cancer
  • intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT)
  • magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
  • mammography
  • ultrasound

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Oncology

Cite this

Comparing preoperative imaging modalities in patient selection for breast intraoperative radiotherapy. / May, Michael; Chin, Christine; Hirji, Sitara; Horowitz, David; Bansil, Hannah; Feldman, Sheldon M.; Ha, Richard; Connolly, Eileen P.

In: Journal of Surgical Oncology, Vol. 118, No. 6, 01.11.2018, p. 959-965.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

May, Michael ; Chin, Christine ; Hirji, Sitara ; Horowitz, David ; Bansil, Hannah ; Feldman, Sheldon M. ; Ha, Richard ; Connolly, Eileen P. / Comparing preoperative imaging modalities in patient selection for breast intraoperative radiotherapy. In: Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2018 ; Vol. 118, No. 6. pp. 959-965.
@article{9d3cff26d5d348a984a049d00c72fb91,
title = "Comparing preoperative imaging modalities in patient selection for breast intraoperative radiotherapy",
abstract = "Background: This study evaluated the relative accuracy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting the tumor size of early stage breast tumors in preoperative selection of patients for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). Methods: We identified 156 patients with clinical T1/T2, N0 breast cancer who underwent IORT. Clinical, pathologic, and radiation data were collected. The preoperative tumor size obtained by imaging was compared with tumor pathological size. Results: The median patient age was 66. The mean tumor size at excision was 1.05 cm (0.1-3.0 cm). Out of the 156 patients, 98 had a reported, nonzero tumor size by mammography, 131 by ultrasound, and 76 by MRI. The mean difference between imaging and the tumor size was +0.062 ± 0.54 cm for mammography, −0.11 ± 0.43 cm for ultrasound, and +0.33 ± 0.55 cm for MRI, with positive values indicating an overestimate of the tumor size. MRI produced more overestimates of tumor size of at least 0.5 cm than mammography or ultrasound in a paired analysis of patients who received both modalities. Conclusions: Accuracy of imaging modalities in determining tumor size can influence patients’ eligibility for IORT. Mammography and ultrasound showed acceptable accuracy in predicting size. MRI overestimated tumor size and may inappropriately exclude patients from IORT. We would discourage ruling out candidates for IORT on the basis of large size by MRI alone.",
keywords = "breast cancer, intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), mammography, ultrasound",
author = "Michael May and Christine Chin and Sitara Hirji and David Horowitz and Hannah Bansil and Feldman, {Sheldon M.} and Richard Ha and Connolly, {Eileen P.}",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/jso.25235",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "118",
pages = "959--965",
journal = "Journal of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "0022-4790",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing preoperative imaging modalities in patient selection for breast intraoperative radiotherapy

AU - May, Michael

AU - Chin, Christine

AU - Hirji, Sitara

AU - Horowitz, David

AU - Bansil, Hannah

AU - Feldman, Sheldon M.

AU - Ha, Richard

AU - Connolly, Eileen P.

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Background: This study evaluated the relative accuracy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting the tumor size of early stage breast tumors in preoperative selection of patients for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). Methods: We identified 156 patients with clinical T1/T2, N0 breast cancer who underwent IORT. Clinical, pathologic, and radiation data were collected. The preoperative tumor size obtained by imaging was compared with tumor pathological size. Results: The median patient age was 66. The mean tumor size at excision was 1.05 cm (0.1-3.0 cm). Out of the 156 patients, 98 had a reported, nonzero tumor size by mammography, 131 by ultrasound, and 76 by MRI. The mean difference between imaging and the tumor size was +0.062 ± 0.54 cm for mammography, −0.11 ± 0.43 cm for ultrasound, and +0.33 ± 0.55 cm for MRI, with positive values indicating an overestimate of the tumor size. MRI produced more overestimates of tumor size of at least 0.5 cm than mammography or ultrasound in a paired analysis of patients who received both modalities. Conclusions: Accuracy of imaging modalities in determining tumor size can influence patients’ eligibility for IORT. Mammography and ultrasound showed acceptable accuracy in predicting size. MRI overestimated tumor size and may inappropriately exclude patients from IORT. We would discourage ruling out candidates for IORT on the basis of large size by MRI alone.

AB - Background: This study evaluated the relative accuracy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting the tumor size of early stage breast tumors in preoperative selection of patients for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). Methods: We identified 156 patients with clinical T1/T2, N0 breast cancer who underwent IORT. Clinical, pathologic, and radiation data were collected. The preoperative tumor size obtained by imaging was compared with tumor pathological size. Results: The median patient age was 66. The mean tumor size at excision was 1.05 cm (0.1-3.0 cm). Out of the 156 patients, 98 had a reported, nonzero tumor size by mammography, 131 by ultrasound, and 76 by MRI. The mean difference between imaging and the tumor size was +0.062 ± 0.54 cm for mammography, −0.11 ± 0.43 cm for ultrasound, and +0.33 ± 0.55 cm for MRI, with positive values indicating an overestimate of the tumor size. MRI produced more overestimates of tumor size of at least 0.5 cm than mammography or ultrasound in a paired analysis of patients who received both modalities. Conclusions: Accuracy of imaging modalities in determining tumor size can influence patients’ eligibility for IORT. Mammography and ultrasound showed acceptable accuracy in predicting size. MRI overestimated tumor size and may inappropriately exclude patients from IORT. We would discourage ruling out candidates for IORT on the basis of large size by MRI alone.

KW - breast cancer

KW - intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT)

KW - magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)

KW - mammography

KW - ultrasound

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053861659&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053861659&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/jso.25235

DO - 10.1002/jso.25235

M3 - Article

C2 - 30261112

AN - SCOPUS:85053861659

VL - 118

SP - 959

EP - 965

JO - Journal of Surgical Oncology

JF - Journal of Surgical Oncology

SN - 0022-4790

IS - 6

ER -