Breast Scintigraphy with Breast-Specific γ-Camera in the Detection of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Correlation with Mammography and Histologic Subtype

Abstract

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a subtype of breast cancer encountered increasingly in clinical practice because of the widespread use of screening mammography. In the present study, we evaluated the usefulness of breast-specific γ-camera (BSGC) scintigraphy in DCIS identification, describing the scintigraphic findings and their correlation with mammography and histologic subtype. Methods: Thirty-three women, aged 41–81 y, with surgically proven DCIS were retrospectively reviewed. Before surgery, all patients underwent breast scintigraphy using a high-resolution semiconductor-based BSGC, starting 10 min after intravenous injection of 740 MBq of ^99mTc-tetrofosmin. All patients had previously undergone mammography. A definitive histologic diagnosis was obtained in all cases after scintigraphy, and the scintigraphic findings were correlated with mammography and histologic subtype. Results: Mammography was positive in 30 of 33 patients (sensitivity, 90.9%), showing calcifications in 22 of 30 (73.3%), masses in 3 of 30 (10%), and masses plus calcifications in the remaining 5 of 30 (16.7%). Scintigraphy was positive in 31 of 33 patients (sensitivity, 93.9%), showing patchy irregular uptake in patients with calcifications and focal uptake in masses; sensitivity was higher in low- to intermediate-grade DCIS than in intermediate/high- and high-grade DCIS (100% vs. 91.3%), but the difference was not statistically significant. Two comedo-type DCIS (one 20-mm intermediate/high-grade and one 15-mm high-grade) with heterogeneously or highly dense breasts at mammography and one papillary low/intermediate-grade DCIS associated with Paget disease were true positive only at scintigraphy. Moreover, scintigraphy better assessed disease extent than did mammography in 5 additional patients. Two comedo-type DCIS (one 6-mm intermediate/high-grade and one 15-mm high-grade) were true positive only at mammography. The difference in sensitivity between scintigraphy and mammography was not statistically significant. The combined use of mammography and scintigraphy achieved 100% sensitivity. Conclusion: BSGC scintigraphy proved to be a highly sensitive diagnostic tool in the detection of DCIS, irrespective of histologic subtype, and with a scintigraphic pattern of uptake that correlated well with mammography findings. In our series, BSGC scintigraphy demonstrated a slightly higher sensitivity than mammography and a better assessment of local disease extent. Thus, BSGC scintigraphy should represent a useful adjunctive tool in breast cancer diagnosis.