Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by August, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by August, D. A.

Radiology, Vol 190, 203-207, Copyright © 1994 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Breast cancer in the elderly patient: early detection with mammography

TE Wilson, MA Helvie and DA August
Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospitals, Ann Arbor 48109-0326.

PURPOSE: To determine the mammographic features and differences in stage of breast carcinomas in elderly women with malignancies detected with palpation or mammography at presentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The mammograms and clinical records of 60 patients (aged 75 years or older) with 62 breast carcinomas, detected during 40 consecutive months, were retrospectively reviewed. A variety of dedicated devices and processing equipment were used. The histologic features, mammographic appearance, mode of detection, and stage of disease were determined. Statistically significant differences between subgroups were calculated with the Student t and chi 2 tests. RESULTS: Sixty cancers (97%) were seen on mammograms. Seventeen tumors detected with annual mammography differed significantly from the 45 carcinomas in nonscreened patients in diameter (1.1 vs 2.1 cm; P < .0005) and stage (14 minimal [82%] of 17 tumors vs 15 minimal [33%] of 45 tumors; P < .0005). Thirty-five nonpalpable malignancies differed significantly from 27 palpable masses in diameter (1.2 vs 2.3 cm; P = .01) and stage (25 tumors minimal [71%] vs four tumors minimal [15%]; P < .0005). CONCLUSION: Screening mammography enabled detection of statistically significantly smaller and earlier-stage tumors, most of which were minimal disease.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
D. B. Reuben, L. W. Bassett, S. H. Hirsch, C. A. Jackson, and R. Bastani
A Randomized Clinical Trial to Assess the Benefit of Offering On-Site Mobile Mammography in Addition to Health Education for Older Women
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2002; 179(6): 1509 - 1514.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1994 by the Radiological Society of North America.