Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition

被引:1207
作者
Kriege, M
Brekelmans, CTM
Boetes, C
Besnard, PE
Zonderland, HM
Obdeijn, IM
Manoliu, RA
Kok, T
Peterse, H
Tilanus-Linthorst, MMA
Muller, SH
Meijer, S
Oosterwijk, JC
Beex, LVAM
Tollenaar, RAEM
de Koning, HJ
Rutgers, EJT
Klijn, JGM
机构
[1] Erasmus MC, Dr Daniel den Hoed Canc Ctr, Dept Med Oncol, Rotterdam Family Canc Clin, NL-3075 EA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Erasmus MC, Dr Daniel den Hoed Canc Ctr, Dept Radiol, NL-3075 EA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[3] Erasmus MC, Dr Daniel den Hoed Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, NL-3075 EA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[4] Univ Med Ctr Nijmegen, Dept Radiol, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[5] Univ Med Ctr Nijmegen, Dept Med Oncol, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[6] Univ Med Ctr Nijmegen, Family Canc Clin, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[7] Netherlands Canc Inst, Dept Radiol, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[8] Netherlands Canc Inst, Dept Pathol, NL-1066 CX Amsterdam, Netherlands
[9] Netherlands Canc Inst, Dept Surg, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[10] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Leiden, Netherlands
[11] Leiden Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Leiden, Netherlands
[12] Free Univ Amsterdam, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[13] Free Univ Amsterdam, Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[14] Univ Groningen Hosp, Dept Radiol, Groningen, Netherlands
[15] Univ Groningen Hosp, Dept Clin Genet, Groningen, Netherlands
[16] Erasmus MC, Dept Publ Hlth, Rotterdam, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
10.1056/NEJMoa031759
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 [临床医学]; 100201 [内科学];
摘要
BACKGROUND: The value of regular surveillance for breast cancer in women with a genetic or familial predisposition to breast cancer is currently unproven. We compared the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with that of mammography for screening in this group of high-risk women. METHODS: Women who had a cumulative lifetime risk of breast cancer of 15 percent or more were screened every six months with a clinical breast examination and once a year by mammography and MRI, with independent readings. The characteristics of the cancers that were detected were compared with the characteristics of those in two different age-matched control groups. RESULTS: We screened 1909 eligible women, including 358 carriers of germ-line mutations. Within a median follow-up period of 2.9 years, 51 tumors (44 invasive cancers, 6 ductal carcinomas in situ, and 1 lymphoma) and 1 lobular carcinoma in situ were detected. The sensitivity of clinical breast examination, mammography, and MRI for detecting invasive breast cancer was 17.9 percent, 33.3 percent, and 79.5 percent, respectively, and the specificity was 98.1 percent, 95.0 percent, and 89.8 percent, respectively. The overall discriminating capacity of MRI was significantly better than that of mammography (P<0.05). The proportion of invasive tumors that were 10 mm or less in diameter was significantly greater in our surveillance group (43.2 percent) than in either control group (14.0 percent [P<0.001] and 12.5 percent [P=0.04], respectively). The combined incidence of positive axillary nodes and micrometastases in invasive cancers in our study was 21.4 percent, as compared with 52.4 percent (P<0.001) and 56.4 percent (P=0.001) in the two control groups. CONCLUSIONS: MRI appears to be more sensitive than mammography in detecting tumors in women with an inherited susceptibility to breast cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:427 / 437
页数:11
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]
Pathologic characteristics of breast parenchyma in patients with hereditary breast carcinoma, including BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers [J].
Adem, C ;
Reynolds, C ;
Soderberg, CL ;
Slezak, JM ;
McDonnell, SK ;
Sebo, TJ ;
Schaid, DJ ;
Myers, JL ;
Sellers, TA ;
Hartmann, LC ;
Jenkins, RB .
CANCER, 2003, 97 (01) :1-11
[2]
American College of Radiology, 1998, ILL BREAST IM REP DA
[3]
Boetes C, 2001, Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, V9, P357
[4]
Effectiveness of breast cancer surveillance in BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers and women with high familial risk [J].
Brekelmans, CTM ;
Seynaeve, C ;
Bartels, CCM ;
Tilanus-Linthorst, MMA ;
Meijers-Heijboer, EJ ;
Crepin, CMG ;
van Geel, AN ;
Menke, M ;
Verhoog, LC ;
van den Ouweland, A ;
Obdeijn, IM ;
Klijn, JGM .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2001, 19 (04) :924-930
[5]
Chart PL, 1997, CAN MED ASSOC J, V157, P1235
[6]
CLAUS EB, 1994, CANCER, V73, P643, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(19940201)73:3<643::AID-CNCR2820730323>3.0.CO
[7]
2-5
[8]
Overview of the main outcomes in breast-cancer prevention trials [J].
Cuzick, J ;
Powles, T ;
Veronesi, U ;
Forbes, J ;
Edwards, R ;
Ashley, S ;
Boyle, P .
LANCET, 2003, 361 (9354) :296-300
[9]
DEKONING HJ, 1995, JNCI-J NATL CANCER I, V87, P1217
[10]
Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations [J].
Elmore, G ;
Barton, MB ;
Moceri, VM ;
Polk, S ;
Arena, PJ ;
Fletcher, SW .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1998, 338 (16) :1089-1096