Pitfall in Assessing the Size of Tumor Phantoms on Mammograms
2013 (English)In: Anticancer Research, ISSN 0250-7005, Vol. 33, no 3, 1131-1134 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Background: Tumor size is crucial for clinical management and prognosis of breast malignancies. Materials and Methods: The gold standard-size of 12 tumor phantoms was assessed at The Department of Production Engineering. Subsequently, with a conventional ruler, seven experienced mammographers measured the largest diameter of the 12 devices in two independent trials. Results: In the first trial, 30% (n=25) of the 84 values given by the seven mammographers failed to recreate the gold standard size by >1 mm and in the second, by 37% (31184). Size was overestimated (>1 mm) in 9.5% (n=8) of 84 measurements in the first trial, and in 15.5% (14184) in the second. Conversely, size was underestimated (>1 mm) in 20% (n=17) of 84 measurements in the first trial, and in 21% (18/84) in the second. Neither the age of the participants, nor their years of experience improved the obtained results. Discussion: The method used here raised doubts concerning the ability of discriminating size among subgroups of T1 breast tumors in mammograms. According to the TNM staging system, T1 tumors (<= 2.0 cm in greatest dimension) are subdivided into T1mic: microinvasion (<= 0.1 cm), T1a (>0.1 cm but not more than 0.5 cm), T1b (>0.5 cm but not more than 1.0 cm) and Tic (>1.0 cm but not more than 2.0 cm in their greatest dimension). Since the TNM staging system for breast tumors is important in therapeutic decision making, it is crucial to develop a more reliable method for tumor size assessment.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 33, no 3, 1131-1134 p.
Breast, mammograms, tumor phantoms, tumor size
Medical and Health Sciences
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-121479ISI: 000316770400051ScopusID: 2-s2.0-84875879706OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-121479DiVA: diva2:619720
QC 201305062013-05-062013-04-292013-05-06Bibliographically approved