An assessment of computed tomography laser mammography in breast cancer diagnosis
More details
Hide details
Department of Radiology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
Department of Radiology, Center of Oncology Institute, Gliwice Branch, Poland
Department of PET Diagnostics, Center of Oncology Institute, Gliwice Branch, Poland
Tumor Pathology Department, Center of Oncology Institute, Gliwice Branch, Poland
Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland
Department of Medical Physics, Center of Oncology Institute, Gliwice Branch, Poland
Katarzyna Steinhof-Radwańska   

Department of Radiology, Medical University of Silesia, Ceglana 35, 40-514 Katowice, Poland. Tel.: +48 695 404 695.
Submission date: 2016-10-27
Acceptance date: 2017-03-29
Online publication date: 2018-02-12
Publication date: 2019-11-15
Pol. Ann. Med. 2018;25(1):21–25
Computed tomography laser mammography (CTLM) is a type of opticaltomography imaging. The main advantage of optical methods is the absence of ionizing radiation. Therefore, it can be used regardless of the age or pregnancy condition of the patient. Moreover, CTLM does not require breast compression.

The aim of the study is to evaluate the accuracy of CTLM for detecting breast cancer and therefore to asses the suitability to place this new technique in the diagnostic chain of procedures.

Material and methods:
A group of 175 white European women were enrolled in the study (age 25–79, average 55 years old). All of the subjects had a CTLM performed in 2006 at the Department of Radiodiagnostics in the Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Centre.

Results and discussion:
Based on the histopathology, breast cancer was found in 70 (40%) cases; in 105 (60%) cases malignancy was not found. When comparing CTLM results to the golden standard of histopathology, a differentiation between benign and malignant foci was found, obtaining the following values for the sensitivity of 71%, specificity of 72%, PPV 63,2% and NPV 79,1%).

The obtained levels of sensitivity and specificity in this study exclude CTLM as a stand-alone diagnostic method and it is assessed as unable to compete with current state-of-the-art approaches.

Athanasiou A, Vanel D, Fournier L, Balleyguier C. Optical mammography; a new technique for visualizing breast lesions in women presenting non palpable BIRADS 4-5 imaging findings; preliminary results with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Cancer Imaging. 2007;7(1):34–40.
van de Ven SM, Wiethoff A, Nielsen T, et al. A nouvel fluorescent imaging agent for diffuse optical tomography of the breast: first clinical experience in patients. Mol Imaging Biol. 2010;12(3):343–348.
van de Ven SM, Elias SG, Wiethoff AJ, et al. Diffuse optical tomography of the breast: preliminary findings of a new prototype and comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2009; 19(5):1108–1113.
Raica M, Cimpean AM, Ribatti D. Angiogenesis in pre-malignant conditions. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(11):1924–1934.
Bobek-Billewicz B, Jurkowski M, Steinhof-Radwanska K, Stobiecka E. Evaluation of laser computer mammography (CTLM) usefulness in differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. Pol J Radiology. 2008;73(1):27–31.
Drexler B, Davis JL, Schofield G. Diaphanography in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology. 1985;157(1):41–44.
Floery D, Helbich TH, Riedl CC, et al. Characterization of benign and malignant breast lesions with computed tomography laser mammography (CTLM): initial experience. Invest Radiol. 2005;40(6): 328–335.
Pattani N, Cutuli B, Mokbel K. Current management of DCIS; a review. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;111(1):1–10.
Brinck U, Fischer U, Korabiowska M, Jutrowski M, Schauer A, Grabbe E. The variability of fibroadenoma in contrast enhanced dynamic MR mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(5):1313–1334.
Helbich TH, Becherer A, Trattnig S, et al. Differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesion: MR imaging versus Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography. Radiology. 1997;202(2):421–429.
Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology. 1996; 200(3):639–649.
Dziukowa J, Wesołowska E. [Mammography in breast cancer diagnostics]. 2nd ed. Warszawa: Medipage; 2006 [in Polish].
Menakuru SR, Brown NJ, Staton CA, Reed MWR. Angiogenesis in pre-malignant conditions. Br J Cancer. 2008; 99(12):1961–1966.
van de Ven SM, Elias SG, van den Bosch MA, Luijten P, Mali WP. Optical imaging of the breast. Cancer Imaging. 2008;8(1):206–215.
Morris E, Liberman L. Breast MRI. New York: Springer; 2005.
Folkman J. What is evidence that tumors are angiogenesis dependent? J Natl Cancer Inst. 1990;82(1):4–6.
Qi J, Ye Z. CTLM as an adjunct to mammography in the diagnosis of patients with dense breast. Clin Imaging. 2013; 37(2):289–294.
Chmielik E. [Pathology report after preoperative breast cancer chemotherapy]. Pol J Pathol. 2009;60(Suppl 1):34–35 [in Polish].