» Articles » PMID: 26657267

In Vivo Tumor Growth Rate Measured by US in Preoperative Period and Long Term Disease Outcome in Breast Cancer Patients

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2015 Dec 15
PMID 26657267
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of tumor growth rate, calculated from tumor size measurements by US, on breast cancer patients' outcome.

Patients And Methods: Breast cancer patients who received at least two serial breast ultrasonographies (US) in our institution during preoperative period and were surgically treated between 2002 and 2010 were reviewed. Tumor growth rate was determined by specific growth rate (SGR) using the two time point tumor sizes by US.

Results: A total of 957 patients were analyzed. The median duration between initial and second US was 28 days (range, 8-140). The median initial tumor size was 1.7 cm (range, 0.4-7.0) and median second size was 1.9 cm (range, 0.3-7.2). 523 (54.6%) cases had increase in size. The median SGR(x10-2) was 0.59 (range, -11.90~31.49) and mean tumor doubling time was 14.51 days. Tumor growth rate was higher when initial tumor size was smaller. Lymphovascular invasion, axillary lymph node metastasis, and higher histologic grade were significantly associated with higher SGR. SGR was significantly associated with disease-free survival (DFS) in a univariate analysis (p = 0.04), but not in a multivariate Cox analysis (p>0.05). High SGR was significantly associated with worse DFS in a subgroup of initial tumor size >2 cm (p = 0.018), but not in those with tumor size <2 cm (p>0.05).

Conclusion: Our results showed that tumor growth rate measured by US in a relatively short time interval was associated with other worse prognostic factors and DFS, but it was not an independent prognostic factor in breast cancer patients.

Citing Articles

The prognostic potential of mammographic growth rate of invasive breast cancer in the Nijmegen breast cancer screening cohort.

Peters J, van Dijck J, Elias S, Otten J, Broeders M J Med Screen. 2024; 31(3):166-175.

PMID: 38295359 PMC: 11330081. DOI: 10.1177/09691413231222765.


Has tumor doubling time in breast cancer changed over the past 80 years? A systematic review.

Dahan M, Hequet D, Bonneau C, Paoletti X, Rouzier R Cancer Med. 2021; 10(15):5203-5217.

PMID: 34264009 PMC: 8335823. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3939.


A Mathematical Model to Predict Diagnostic Periods for Secondary Distant Metastases in Patients with ER/PR/HER2/Ki-67 Subtypes of Breast Cancer.

Tyuryumina E, Neznanov A, Turumin J Cancers (Basel). 2020; 12(9).

PMID: 32825078 PMC: 7563940. DOI: 10.3390/cancers12092344.


Tumor Volume Kinetic Analyses Might Explain Excellent Prognoses in Young Patients with Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma.

Kasahara T, Miyauchi A, Ito Y, Kudo T, Masuoka H, Higashiyama T J Thyroid Res. 2020; 2020:4652767.

PMID: 32733666 PMC: 7383345. DOI: 10.1155/2020/4652767.


Radiological audit of interval breast cancers: Estimation of tumour growth rates.

MacInnes E, Duffy S, Simpson J, Wallis M, Turnbull A, Wilkinson L Breast. 2020; 51:114-119.

PMID: 32298962 PMC: 7375675. DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.03.006.


References
1.
Mehrara E, Forssell-Aronsson E, Ahlman H, Bernhardt P . Quantitative analysis of tumor growth rate and changes in tumor marker level: specific growth rate versus doubling time. Acta Oncol. 2009; 48(4):591-7. DOI: 10.1080/02841860802616736. View

2.
Boisserie-Lacroix M, MacGrogan G, Debled M, Ferron S, Asad-Syed M, McKelvie-Sebileau P . Triple-negative breast cancers: associations between imaging and pathological findings for triple-negative tumors compared with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative breast cancers. Oncologist. 2013; 18(7):802-11. PMC: 3720633. DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0380. View

3.
Wagner J, Warneke C, Mittendorf E, Bedrosian I, Babiera G, Kuerer H . Delays in primary surgical treatment are not associated with significant tumor size progression in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg. 2011; 254(1):119-24. PMC: 4345121. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318217e97f. View

4.
White E, Mandelson M, Taplin S . Variation in mammographic breast density by race. Ann Epidemiol. 2001; 11(4):257-63. DOI: 10.1016/s1047-2797(00)00225-8. View

5.
PEARLMAN A . Breast cancer--influence of growth rate on prognosis and treatment evaluation: a study based on mastectomy scar recurrences. Cancer. 1976; 38(4):1826-33. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(197610)38:4<1826::aid-cncr2820380460>3.0.co;2-l. View