The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer with MR imaging.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to investigate the accuracy of contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the locoregional staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer and to determine the impact of contrast-enhanced MR imaging in planning surgical management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety patients with primary breast cancer (including two bilateral cancers) diagnosed and treated on the basis of conventional triple assessment (clinical, cytologic, and mammographic examination) underwent MR imaging at 1.0 T using a three-dimensional fast low-angle shot T1-weighted pulse sequence before and after contrast enhancement. A short inversion time inversion recovery sequence was also obtained to evaluate the axilla of each patient. After resection, tumors were histopathologically mapped in detail and correlated with the extent of contrast enhancement on MR imaging. RESULTS: On the basis of triple assessment, 53 cancers were treated by wide local excision, of which 17 (32%) had positive margins at excision. Residual disease at reexcision was detected in eight of these 17 patients, a finding that correlated accurately with the extent of contrast enhancement on MR imaging. MR imaging was more accurate than mammography in determining invasive tumor size (r2 = .93 versus r2 = .59), in depicting multifocality and extensive intraductal component (sensitivity, 81% versus 62%), and in assessing nipple-retroareolar complex. MR imaging-histopathologic correlation was possible in 75 axillae. Sensitivity and specificity for axillary node metastases were 90% and 82%, respectively. CONCLUSION: MR imaging of the breast has value in the preoperative locoregional staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer and is useful in planning a single definitive surgical resection in patients with breast cancer.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Houssami, N., Ciatto, S., Macaskill, P., Lord, S. J., Warren, R. M., Dixon, J. M., & Irwig, L. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.15.2108 · Cited by 831
MR Imaging of the Breast for the Detection, Diagnosis, and Staging of Breast Cancer
Orel, S. G., & Schnall, M. D. (2001) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.220.1.r01jl3113 · Cited by 759
Current Status of Breast MR Imaging Part 2. Clinical Applications
Kuhl, C. K. (2007) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2443051661 · Cited by 377
Katipamula, R., Degnim, A. C., Hoskin, T., Boughey, J. C., Loprinzi, C., Grant, C. S., Brandt, K. R., Pruthi, S., Chute, C. G., Olson, J. E., et al. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2008.19.4225 · Cited by 373
ADC Mapping of Benign and Malignant Breast Tumors
WOODHAMS, R., MATSUNAGA, K., KAN, S., HATA, H., OZAKI, M., IWABUCHI, K., KURANAMI, M., WATANABE, M., & HAYAKAWA, K. (2005) · Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences · doi:10.2463/mrms.4.35 · Cited by 329
Metadata
- Authors
- Mumtaz, H., Hall-Craggs, M. A., Davidson, T., Walmsley, K., Thurell, W., Kissin, M. W., & Taylor, I.
- Venue
- American Journal of Roentgenology
- Publisher
- American Roentgen Ray Society
- Published
- 1997-08
- Volume
- 169
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 417-424
- ISSN
- 0002-9580 (ISSN-L)
- 0361-803X
- 1546-3141
- OpenAlex
- W2039797735
- Cited by
- 291
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer with MR imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2214/ajr.169.2.9242745
- The paper
- Mumtaz, H., Hall-Craggs, M. A., Davidson, T., Walmsley, K., Thurell, W., Kissin, M. W., & Taylor, I. (1997). Staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer with MR imaging. American Journal of Roentgenology. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.169.2.9242745
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.