Abstract
Background: We examined the clinicopathologic profile of T1 cancers to determine whether palpable cancers are different from nonpalpable cancers.
Methods: A prospective database was reviewed. Palpable T1 cancers were compared with nonpalpable T1 cancers. Initial significance was determined by χ2 analysis. Factors found to be significant were then reanalyzed, controlling for tumor size by logistic or linear regression, as appropriate.
Results: Of 1263 T1 cancers treated between 1981 and 2000, 857 (68%) were palpable and 401 (32%) were nonpalpable. Palpability correlated with pathologic tumor size, mitotic grade, nuclear grade, high S-phase, lymphovascular invasion, nodal positivity, and lack of extensive intraductal component, multifocality, and multicentricity. There was no significant difference in estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor or Her-2/neu status, ploidy, or DNA index. Breast cancer-specific survival was worse for patients with palpable cancers.
Conclusions: Palpable cancers are inherently different from nonpalpable cancers, with a less diffuse growth pattern, higher metastatic potential, higher proliferative activity, more nuclear abnormalities, and a worse prognosis.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Dixon W, Massey F. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. 4th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 1983.
Kalbfleisch J, Prentice R. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1980.
Kricker A, Farac K, Smith D, et al. Breast cancer in New South Wales in 1972–1995: tumor size and the impact of mammographic screening. Int J Cancer 1999; 81: 877–80.
Moody C, Corder A, Mullee M, et al. The impact of the first 3 years of breast cancer screening on the overall presentation of breast cancer. J R Soc Med 1994; 87: 259–62.
Hutchison J, Tucker A. Breast screening results from a healthy working population. Clin Oncol 1984; 10: 123–8.
Benedict S, Williams R, Hoomani J. Method of discovery of breast cancer. Cancer Pract 1996; 4: 147–55.
Rodes N, Lopez M, Pearson D, et al. The impact of breast cancer screening on survival. A 5- to 10-year follow-up study. Cancer 1986; 57: 581–5.
Cody H. The impact of mammography in 1096 consecutive pa-tients with breast cancer, 1979–1993: equal value for patients younger and older than age 50 years. Cancer 1995; 76: 1579–84.
Letton A, Mason E. routine breast screening. Survival after 10.5 years follow-up. Ann Surg 1986; 203: 470–3.
Tifft J, Jarjoura D. Breast cancer screening in a private women’s clinic. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988; 158: 1402’7.
Baker L. Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report. CA Cancer J Clin 1982; 32: 194–225.
Tafra L, Essner R, Brenner R, Giuliano A. Nonpalpable versus palpable invasive breast tumors treated with breast-conserving surgical management. Am Surg 1996; 62: 395–9.
Cady B, Stone M, Schuler J, et al. The new era in breast cancer. Invasion, size, and nodal involvement dramatically decreasing as a result of mammographic screening. Arch Surg 1996; 131: 301’8.
Hislop T, Worth A, Kan L, Rousseau E. Post screen-detected breast cancer within the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 42: 235–42.
Edeiken S. Mammography and palpable cancer of the breast. Cancer 1988; 61: 263–5.
Ciatto S, Cecchini S, Iossa A, et al. Prognosis of nonpalpable infiltrating carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990; 170: 61–4.
Silverstein M, Gamagami P, Masetti R, et al. Results from a multidisciplinary breast center. Analysis of disease discovered. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1997; 6: 301–14.
Crosier M, Scott D, Wilson R, et al. Differences in Ki67 and c-erbB2 expression between screen-detected and true interval can-cers. Clin Cancer Res 1999; 5: 2682–8.
Perdue P, Page D, Nellestein M, et al. Early detection of breast carcinoma: a comparison of palpable and nonpalpable lesions. Surgery 1992; 111: 656–9.
Tweedie E, Tonkin K, Kerkvliet N, et al. Biologic characteristics of breast cancer detected by mammography and by palpation in a screening program: a pilot study. Clin Invest Med 1997; 20: 300–7.
Groenendijk R, Bult P, Tewarie L, et al. Screen-detected breast cancers have a lower mitotic activity index. Br J Cancer 2000; 82: 381–4.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Presented in part at the 54th Annual Cancer Symposium of the Society of Surgical Oncology, Washington, DC, March 15–18, 2001.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Skinner, K.A., Silberman, H., Sposto, R. et al. Palpable Breast Cancers Are Inherently Different From Nonpalpable Breast Cancers. Ann Surg Oncol 8, 705–710 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0705-1
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0705-1