Skip To Content
 

Search:

  

Diagnostic Imaging Pathways - Staging of Breast Cancer
PathwaysHome
Flow Chart
Image gallery
Teaching Points
References
PDF Version

References

  1. Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, et al. Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System for Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncology 2002;20:3628-36.
  2. Greene F, Page D, Fleming I, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2002.
  3. Breast Imaging: a guide for practice. National Breast Cancer Centre, 2002. (Review article)
  4. NHMRC National Breast Cancer Centre. The investigation of a new breast symptom: a guide for general practitioners. Woolloomooloo (NSW): NHMRC National Breast Cancer Centre, 1997. (Evidence based guideline).
  5. Echlund GW. The art of mammographic positioning, in radiological diagnosis of breast diseases. Berlin: Springer, 1997.
  6. Faulk RM, Sickles EA. Efficacy of spot compression-magnification and tangential views in mammographic evaluation of palpable breast masses. Radiology 1992;185:87-90. (Level III evidence)
  7. Feig SA. The importance of supplementary mammographic views to diagnostic accuracy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1988;151:40-1. (Review article)
  8. Berkowitz JE, Gatewood OM, Gayler BW. Equivocal mammographic findings: evaluation with spot compression. Radiology 1989;171:369-71. (Level IV evidence)
  9. Foxcroft LM, Evans EB, Joshua HK, Hirst C. Breast cancers invisible on mammography. Aust NZ J Surg 2000;70:162-7. (Level III evidence)
  10. Heinisch M, Gallowitsch HJ, Mikosch P, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the evaluation of suggestive breast lesions. The Breast 2003;12:17-22. (Level III evidence)
  11. Walter C, Scheidhauer K, Scharl A, et al. Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1651-56. (Level III evidence)
  12. Malich A, Boehm T, Facius M, et al. Differentiation of Mammographically Suspicious Lesions: Evaluation of Breast Ultrasound, MRI Mammography and Electrical Impedance Scanning as Adjunctive Technologies in Breast Cancer Detection. Clinical Radiology 2001;56:278-283. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  13. Hata T, Takahashi H, Watanabe K, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Preoperative Evaluation of Breast Cancer: A Comparative Study with Mammography and Ultrasonography. J Am Coll Surg 2004;198:190-7. (Level II/III evidence)
  14. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast Carcinoma: Effect of Preoperative Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging on the Therapeutic Approach. Radiology 1999;213:881-8. (Level I evidence). Click here to view reference
  15. Harms SE, Rabinovitch R, Julian T, Rafferty E, Masood S, Weatehrall P. Report of the Working Groups on Breast MRI: Report of the Breast Cancer Staging Group. The Breast Journal 2004;10(S5):S3-8.
  16. Wedegartner U, Bick U, Wortler K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G. Differentiation between benign and malignant findings on MR-mammography: usefulness of morphological criteria. Eur Radiol 2001;11:1645-50. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  17. NCCN Breast Cancer Panel. Breast Cancer. Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology v1.2009. National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2009.(Evidence based guideline). Click here to view reference
  18. Myers RE, Johnston M, Pritchard K, et al. Baseline staging tests in primary breast cancer: a practice guideline. CMAJ 2001;164:1439-44. (Clinical Guideline)
  19. Ciatto S, Pacini P, Azzini V, et al. Preoperative Staging of Primary Breast Cancer. A Multicentric Study. Cancer 1988;61:1038-40. (Level III/IV evidence)
  20. Glynne-Jones R, Young T, Ahmed A, Ell PJ, Berry RJl. How Far Investigaitions for Occult Metastases in Breast Cancer Aid the Clinician. Clinical Oncology 1991;3:65-72 (Level IV evidence)
  21. Ravaioli A, Tassinari D, Pasini G, et al. Staging of breast cancer: What standards should be used in research and clinical practice? Ann Oncol 1998;9:1173-77. (Level III evidence)
  22. Rybak LD, Rosenthal DI. Radiological imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastases. Q J Nucl Med 2001;45:53-64. (Review article)
  23. Schaffer DL, Pendergrass HP. Comparison of enzyme, clinical, radiographic, and radiographic methods of detecting bone metastases from carcinoma of the prostate. Radiology 1976;121:431-4. (Level III evidence)
  24. Brar HS, Sisley JF, Johnson RH Jr. Value of preoperative bone and liver scans and alkaline phosphatase in the evaluation of breast cancer patients. Am J Surg 1993;165:221-4. (Level III evidence)
  25. Cox MR, Gilliland R, Odling-Smee GW, Spence RAJ. An evaluation of radionuclide bone scanning and liver ultrasonography for staging breast cancer. Aust NZ J Surg 1992;62:550-5 (Level II/III evidence)
  26. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, Hortobagyi GN, Ueno NT. Bone Imaging in Metastatic Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2942-53. (Review article)
  27. Aarsvold JN, Alazraki NP. Update on Detection of Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Patients With Breast Cancer. Semin Nucl Med 2005;35:116-28. (Review article)
  28. Kaleya RN, Heckman JT, Most M, Zager JS. Lymphatic Mapping and Sentinel Node Biopsy: A Surgical Perspective. Semin Nucl Med 2005;35:129-34. (Review article)
  29. Albertini JJ, Lyman GH, Cox C, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the pateint with breast cancer. JAMA 1996;276:1818-22. (Level II evidence)
  30. Liberman L, Cody HS 3rd, Hill AD, et al. Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy after Percutaneous Diagnosis of Non-palpable Breast Cancer. Radiology 1999;211:835-44. (Level III evidence)
  31. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, et al. The Sentinel Node in Breast Cancer. A Multicenter Validation Study. NEJM 1998;339:941-6. (Level I evidence). Click here to view reference
  32. Rubio IS, Korouian S, Cowan C, Krag DN, Colvert M, Klimberg VS. Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Staging Breast Cancer. Am J Surg 1998;176:532-37. (Level III evidence)
  33. Veronesi U, Galimberti V, Zurrida S, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy as an indicator for axillary dissection in early breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2001;37:454-8. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  34. O'Hea BJ, Hill AD, El-Shirbiny AM, et al. Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer: Initial Experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. J Am Coll Surg 1998;186:423-7. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  35. Kuehn T, Vogl FD, Helms G. Sentinel-node biopsy for axillary staging in breast cancer: results from a large prospective German multi-institutional trial. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 2004;30:252-259. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  36. Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, et al. Breast Imaging with Positron Emission Tomography and Fluorine-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose: Use and Limitations. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3495-3502. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  37. Schirrmeister H, Kuhn T, Guhlmann A, et al. Fluorine-18 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-d-glucose PET in the preoperative staging of breast cancer: comparison with the standard staging procedures. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:351-8. (Level III evidence)
  38. Greco M, Crippa F, Agresti R, et al. Axillary Lymph Node Staging in Breast Cancer by 2-Fluoro-2-dexoy-d-glucose-Positron Emission Tomography: Clinical Evaluation and Alternative Management. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:630-5. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  39. Wahl RL, Siegel BA, Coleman E, Gatsonis C. Prospective Multicenter Study of Axillary Nodal Staging by Positron Emission Tomography in Breast Cancer: A Report of the Staging Breast Cancer with PET Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:277-85. (Level I evidence). Click here to view reference
  40. Smith IC, Ogston KN, Whitford P, et al. Staging of the Axilla in Breast Cancer. Accurate In Vivo Assessment Using Positron Emission Tomography With 2-(Fluorine-18)-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose. Annals of Surgery 1998;228:20-7. (Level III evidence)
  41. Avril N, Dose J, Janicke F, et al. Assessment of Axillary Lymph Node Involvement in Breast Cancer Patients With Positron Emission Tomography Using Radiolabeled 2-(Fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:1204-9. (Level II evidence). Click here to view reference
  42. Dose J, Bleckmann C, Bachmann S, et al. Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and "conventional diagnostic procedures" for the detection of distant metastases in breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2002;23:857-64 40
  43. Dubrow RA, David CL, Libshitz HI, Lorigan JG. Detection of hepatic metastases in breast cancer: the role of nonenhanced and enhanced CT scanning. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1990;14(3):366-9 (Level IV evidence)
  44. Lehman C, Gatsonis C, Kuhl C et al. MRI evaluation of the Contralateral Breast in women with Recently Diagnosed Breast Cancer NEJM 2007;356:1295-1303 (Level II evidence) Click here to view reference
  45. Peters NH, Borel Rinkes IH, Zuithoff NP et al. Meta-analysis of MR imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 2008 Jan;246(1);116-124 (Level I evidence)
  46. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008 Jul 1;26(19);3248-3258. (Level I evidence) .Click here to view reference
  47. Solin LJ, Orel SG, Hwang WT et al. Relationship of breast magnetic resonance imaging to outcome after breast-conservation treatment with radiation for women with early-stage invasive breast carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2008 Jan 20;26(3);386-391. (Level II evidence)
  48. Fischer U, Zachariae O, Baum F et al. The influence of preoperative MRI of the breasts on recurrence rate in patients with breast cancer. European radiology 2004 Oct;14(10);1725-1731. (Level II evidence)

File Formats

Some documents for download on this website are in a Portable Document Format (PDF). To read these files you might need to download Adobe® Acrobat Reader.

Get Adobe Reader

Legal Matters