Surveillance Outcomes by Imaging Methods in the First 5 Years After Breast Cancer Surgery.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Korean Journal of Radiology Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-17 DOI:10.3348/kjr.2024.1101
Myoung Kyoung Kim, Min Su Park, Min Gyu Go, Jeong Eon Lee, Jong Han Yu, Boo-Kyung Han, Eun Young Ko, Ji Soo Choi, Jeongmin Lee, Haejung Kim, Yeon Hee Park, Eun Sook Ko
{"title":"Surveillance Outcomes by Imaging Methods in the First 5 Years After Breast Cancer Surgery.","authors":"Myoung Kyoung Kim, Min Su Park, Min Gyu Go, Jeong Eon Lee, Jong Han Yu, Boo-Kyung Han, Eun Young Ko, Ji Soo Choi, Jeongmin Lee, Haejung Kim, Yeon Hee Park, Eun Sook Ko","doi":"10.3348/kjr.2024.1101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the outcomes of imaging methods (mammography alone, ultrasound [US] alone, mammography combined with US, and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]-based examination) for surveillance during the first 5 years after breast cancer surgery.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent breast cancer surgery at a single institution between January 2011 and December 2015. Imaging surveillance was performed at 6-month or 1-year intervals during the first 5 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 6371 women (median age, 49 years; age range, 20-90 years) underwent 28199 mammograms, 42759 US, and 2619 MRI examinations. Of 172 second breast cancer diagnoses, 19 (11.0%) were interval cancers. Mammography combined with US demonstrated higher cancer detection rate (CDR) compared to mammography alone (odds ratios [OR] = 3.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.52-8.96, <i>P</i> = 0.009) and US alone (OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.71-4.65, <i>P</i> < 0.001), whereas there was no statistical significance when compared with MRI-based examinations (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.49-1.74, <i>P</i> > 0.999). A statistically significant interaction was observed between the mammographic breast density (MBD) and CDR of the imaging methods (<i>P</i> for interaction = 0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CDR of surveillance mammography combined with US was comparable with that of MRI-based examinations in an intensive surveillance setting. Considering the significant interaction between MBD and the CDR, a tailored approach for surveillance based on breast density is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":17881,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"532-545"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2024.1101","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the outcomes of imaging methods (mammography alone, ultrasound [US] alone, mammography combined with US, and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]-based examination) for surveillance during the first 5 years after breast cancer surgery.

Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent breast cancer surgery at a single institution between January 2011 and December 2015. Imaging surveillance was performed at 6-month or 1-year intervals during the first 5 years.

Results: A total of 6371 women (median age, 49 years; age range, 20-90 years) underwent 28199 mammograms, 42759 US, and 2619 MRI examinations. Of 172 second breast cancer diagnoses, 19 (11.0%) were interval cancers. Mammography combined with US demonstrated higher cancer detection rate (CDR) compared to mammography alone (odds ratios [OR] = 3.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.52-8.96, P = 0.009) and US alone (OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.71-4.65, P < 0.001), whereas there was no statistical significance when compared with MRI-based examinations (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.49-1.74, P > 0.999). A statistically significant interaction was observed between the mammographic breast density (MBD) and CDR of the imaging methods (P for interaction = 0.003).

Conclusion: The CDR of surveillance mammography combined with US was comparable with that of MRI-based examinations in an intensive surveillance setting. Considering the significant interaction between MBD and the CDR, a tailored approach for surveillance based on breast density is warranted.

乳腺癌手术后前5年影像学监测结果。
目的:比较乳腺癌术后前5年影像学检查(单纯乳房x光检查、单纯超声检查、乳房x光检查联合超声检查和磁共振成像检查)的监测结果。材料与方法:本回顾性队列研究分析了2011年1月至2015年12月在同一机构接受乳腺癌手术的患者的医疗记录。前5年每隔6个月或1年进行影像学监测。结果:共6371名女性(中位年龄49岁;年龄范围,20-90岁)进行了28199次乳房x光检查,42759次超声检查和2619次MRI检查。在172例二次乳腺癌诊断中,19例(11.0%)为间期癌。乳房x线摄影联合US的肿瘤检出率(CDR)高于单纯乳房x线摄影(比值比[OR] = 3.31, 95%可信区间[CI]: 1.52 ~ 8.96, P = 0.009)和单纯US (OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.71 ~ 4.65, P < 0.001),而与基于mri的检查相比,差异无统计学意义(OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.49 ~ 1.74, P > 0.999)。乳腺x线摄影乳腺密度(MBD)与影像学方法的CDR之间存在显著的交互作用(交互作用P = 0.003)。结论:在强化监测环境下,监测乳房x线摄影联合US的CDR与基于mri的检查相当。考虑到MBD和CDR之间的重要相互作用,基于乳腺密度的量身定制的监测方法是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Korean Journal of Radiology
Korean Journal of Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
141
审稿时长
1.3 months
期刊介绍: The inaugural issue of the Korean J Radiol came out in March 2000. Our journal aims to produce and propagate knowledge on radiologic imaging and related sciences. A unique feature of the articles published in the Journal will be their reflection of global trends in radiology combined with an East-Asian perspective. Geographic differences in disease prevalence will be reflected in the contents of papers, and this will serve to enrich our body of knowledge. World''s outstanding radiologists from many countries are serving as editorial board of our journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信