A Comparative Study between the Preoperative Diagnostic Tumor Size and the Postoperative Pathologic Tumor Size in Patients with Breast Tumors.
10.4048/jbc.2010.13.2.187
- Author:
Ki Tae HWANG
1
;
Hyeyoung KIM
;
Jung Kee CHUNG
;
In Mok JUNG
;
Seung Chul HEO
;
Young Joon AHN
;
Hye Seong AHN
;
Joo Hee CHA
;
Se Yeong CHUNG
;
Mee Soo CHANG
;
Dong Young NOH
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Boramae Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Comparative Study ; Original Article
- Keywords:
Breast neoplasms;
Comparative study;
Tumor burden
- MeSH:
Body Mass Index;
Body Weight;
Breast;
Breast Neoplasms;
Humans;
Magnetic Resonance Imaging;
Mammography;
Physical Examination;
Retrospective Studies;
Tumor Burden
- From:Journal of Breast Cancer
2010;13(2):187-197
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This comparative study analyzed the relationship between the preoperative diagnostic tumor size and the postoperative pathologic tumor size for breast cancer patients and benign breast tumor patients. METHODS: We analyzed the clinicopathological information of 191 breast cancer patients and 187 benign breast tumor patients by conducting a retrospective chart review. The preoperative diagnostic tumor sizes were measured using physical examination, mammography and sonography in the benign breast tumor patients and they were additionally measured by computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the breast cancer patients. Body mass index (BMI) was defined as the ratio of the body weight in kilograms to the square of height in meters. RESULTS: The tumor sizes measured by mammography (r=0.66) and physical examination (r=0.87) were highly correlated to the pathologic tumor size in the breast cancer patients and benign the breast tumor patients, respectively. Physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging had a tendency to overestimate the tumor size and sonography underestimated the pathologic tumor size in the breast cancer patients. The correlation coefficient for the physical examination was increased when the patient age was less than 50 years and the BMI was less than 25. Multiple regression analysis revealed that assessing the tumor size according to physical examination, mammography and sonography were effective for determining estimation of pathologic tumor size in the benign breast tumor patients, but assessing the tumor size by physical examination and sonography was not effective for determining the tumor size in breast cancer patients. CONCLUSION: Mammography and physical examination can be useful to estimate the pathologic tumor size in breast cancer patients and benign breast tumor patients, respectively. Physical examination can be useful to estimate the size when a breast tumor is palpable, the age of a patient is less than 50, and the BMI is less than 25.
