Department of Clinical Radiology, Diagnostic Imaging Centre, Kuopio University Hospital, Puijonlaaksontie 2, 70210, Kuopio, Finland.
School of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistonranta 1, 70210, Kuopio, Finland.
Sci Rep. 2024 May 1;14(1):10001. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-60740-0.
Interval breast cancers are diagnosed between scheduled screenings and differ in many respects from screening-detected cancers. Studies comparing the survival of patients with interval and screening-detected cancers have reported differing results. The aim of this study was to investigate the radiological and histopathological features and growth rates of screening-detected and interval breast cancers and subsequent survival. This retrospective study included 942 female patients aged 50-69 years with breast cancers treated and followed-up at Kuopio University Hospital between January 2010 and December 2016. The screening-detected and interval cancers were classified as true, minimal-signs, missed, or occult. The radiological features were assessed on mammograms by one of two specialist breast radiologists with over 15 years of experience. A χ test was used to examine the association between radiological and pathological variables; an unpaired t test was used to compare the growth rates of missed and minimal-signs cancers; and the Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to examine survival after screening-detected and interval cancers. Sixty occult cancers were excluded, so a total of 882 women (mean age 60.4 ± 5.5 years) were included, in whom 581 had screening-detected cancers and 301 interval cancers. Disease-specific survival, overall survival and disease-free survival were all worse after interval cancer than after screening-detected cancer (p < 0.001), with a mean follow-up period of 8.2 years. There were no statistically significant differences in survival between the subgroups of screening-detected or interval cancers. Missed interval cancers had faster growth rates (0.47% ± 0.77%/day) than missed screening-detected cancers (0.21% ± 0.11%/day). Most cancers (77.2%) occurred in low-density breasts (< 25%). The most common lesion types were masses (73.9%) and calcifications (13.4%), whereas distortions (1.8%) and asymmetries (1.7%) were the least common. Survival was worse after interval cancers than after screening-detected cancers, attributed to their more-aggressive histopathological characteristics, more nodal and distant metastases, and faster growth rates.
间隔期乳腺癌是在定期筛查期间诊断出来的,与筛查发现的癌症在许多方面存在差异。比较间隔期和筛查发现的癌症患者生存情况的研究报告结果不同。本研究旨在探讨筛查发现的和间隔期乳腺癌的影像学和组织病理学特征以及生长速度,并分析其后续生存情况。这项回顾性研究纳入了 942 名年龄在 50-69 岁之间的女性患者,她们于 2010 年 1 月至 2016 年 12 月在库奥皮奥大学医院接受治疗和随访。将筛查发现的和间隔期乳腺癌分为真实、微小表现、漏诊和隐匿性。两位具有 15 年以上经验的乳腺放射科专家在乳腺 X 线片上评估影像学特征。采用卡方检验分析影像学和病理学变量之间的关系;采用独立样本 t 检验比较漏诊和微小表现型癌症的生长速度;采用 Kaplan-Meier 估计法分析筛查发现的和间隔期乳腺癌的生存情况。排除 60 例隐匿性癌症后,共纳入 882 名女性(平均年龄 60.4±5.5 岁),其中 581 名患者为筛查发现的乳腺癌,301 名患者为间隔期乳腺癌。与筛查发现的乳腺癌相比,间隔期乳腺癌的疾病特异性生存率、总体生存率和无病生存率均更差(p<0.001),平均随访时间为 8.2 年。筛查发现的或间隔期乳腺癌的亚组之间的生存情况无统计学差异。漏诊的间隔期乳腺癌的生长速度(0.47%±0.77%/天)快于漏诊的筛查发现的乳腺癌(0.21%±0.11%/天)。大多数癌症(77.2%)发生在低密乳腺(<25%)中。最常见的病变类型是肿块(73.9%)和钙化(13.4%),而扭曲(1.8%)和不对称(1.7%)最少见。与筛查发现的乳腺癌相比,间隔期乳腺癌的生存情况更差,这归因于其侵袭性更强的组织病理学特征、更多的淋巴结和远处转移以及更快的生长速度。