Bibliografia

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians 2017; 67(1): 7-30.

2. AIOM AIdOM. Linee guida. Neoplasie della mammella: AIOM; 2016. 3. Bevilacqua G, Naccarato AG, Viacava P. Patologia della mammella. In: Gallo P, D'Amati G, eds. Anatomia patologica La sistematica. Torino: UTET; 2008: 1021-68.

4. Ruiz R, Herrero C, Strasser-Weippl K, et al. Epidemiology and pathophysiology of pregnancy-associated breast cancer: A review. Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) 2017; 35: 136-41.

5. Singletary SE. Rating the risk factors for breast cancer. Annals of surgery 2003; 237(4): 474-82.

6. Rosenberg LU, Granath F, Dickman PW, et al. Menopausal hormone therapy in relation to breast cancer characteristics and prognosis: a cohort study. Breast cancer research : BCR 2008; 10(5): R78.

7. Dagdemir A, Durif J, Ngollo M, Bignon YJ, Bernard-Gallon D. Breast cancer: mechanisms involved in action of phytoestrogens and epigenetic changes. In vivo (Athens, Greece) 2013; 27(1): 1-9.

8. Morris CR, Wright WE, Schlag RD. The risk of developing breast cancer within the next 5, 10, or 20 years of a woman's life. American journal of

preventive medicine 2001; 20(3): 214-8.

9. Hayanga AJ, Newman LA. Investigating the phenotypes and genotypes of breast cancer in women with African ancestry: the need for more genetic

epidemiology. The Surgical clinics of North America 2007; 87(2): 551-68, xii. 10. Jeffrey SS, Lonning PE, Hillner BE. Genomics-based prognosis and therapeutic prediction in breast cancer. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN 2005; 3(3): 291-300.

57

11. Walsh T, Casadei S, Coats KH, et al. Spectrum of mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, CHEK2, and TP53 in families at high risk of breast cancer. Jama 2006; 295(12): 1379-88.

12. Gallo P, D'Amati G. Anatomia Patologica Sistematica; 2007.

13. Lester SC. La mammella. In: Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N, Aster JC, eds. Robbins e Cotran - Le basi patologiche delle malattie: Patologia generale. 8.a ed. Milano: Elsevier Health Sciences Italy; 2011: 1051-81.

14. Schnitt SJ. Classification and prognosis of invasive breast cancer: from morphology to molecular taxonomy. Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc 2010; 23 Suppl 2: S60-4.

15. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ. Strategies for subtypes--dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 2011; 22(8): 1736-47.

16. Vanden Bempt I, Drijkoningen M, De Wolf-Peeters C. The complexity of genotypic alterations underlying HER2-positive breast cancer: an explanation for its clinical heterogeneity. Current opinion in oncology 2007; 19(6): 552-7. 17. Turner NC, Reis-Filho JS. Basal-like breast cancer and the BRCA1 phenotype. Oncogene 2006; 25(43): 5846-53.

18. Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Ellis IO. Basal-Like Breast Cancer: A Critical Review. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2008; 26(15): 2568-81.

19. D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA, et al. ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013.

20. Madjar H, Rickard M, Jellins J, Otto R. IBUS guidelines for the ultrasonic examination of the breast. IBUS International Faculty. International Breast Ultrasound School. European journal of ultrasound : official journal of the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology 1999; 9(1): 99-102.

58

21. Mendelson EB, Böhm-Vélez M, Berg WA, et al. ACR BI-RADS® Ultrasound. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013.

22. Vecchio S, Albanese A, Vignoli P, Taibi A. A novel approach to digital breast tomosynthesis for simultaneous acquisition of 2D and 3D images. European radiology 2011; 21(6): 1207-13.

23. Sickles, EA, D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, et al. ACR BI-RADS®

Mammography. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013.

24. Le-Petross HC, Hylton N. Role of breast MR imaging in neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America 2010; 18(2): 249-58, viii-ix.

25. Pavic D, Koomen MA, Kuzmiak CM, Lee YH, Pisano ED. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Technology in cancer research & treatment 2004; 3(6): 527-41.

26. Wilson AR, Marotti L, Bianchi S, et al. The requirements of a specialist Breast Centre. European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) 2013; 49(17): 3579-87.

27. Panizza P, Vigano S, Bonelli L, et al. Screening women at intermediate risk: harm or charm? European journal of radiology 2012; 81 Suppl 1: S116-7. 28. Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH, et al. ACR BI-RADS® Magnetic Resonance Imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013.

29. Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 2001; 220(1): 13-30. 30. Hill A, Mehnert A, Crozier S, et al. Dynamic breast MRI: image registration and its impact on enhancement curve estimation. Conference proceedings : Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Annual Conference 2006; 1: 3049-52.

59

31. Sinn HP, Helmchen B, Wittekind CH. [TNM classification of breast cancer: changes and comments on the 7th edition]. Der Pathologe 2010; 31(5): 361-6.

32. American Joint Committee on Cancer. Breast. In: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 7th ed. New York: Springer; 2010: 347–369.

33. Allemani C, Sant M, Weir HK, et al. Breast cancer survival in the US and Europe: a CONCORD high-resolution study. International journal of cancer 2013; 132(5): 1170-81.

34. Sanchez AM, Franceschini G, Orlandi A, Di Leone A, Masetti R. New challenges in multimodal workout of locally advanced breast cancer. The surgeon : journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland 2017. 35. Giordano SH. Update on locally advanced breast cancer. The oncologist 2003; 8(6): 521-30.

36. Dalton LW, Pinder SE, Elston CE, et al. Histologic grading of breast cancer: linkage of patient outcome with level of pathologist agreement. Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc 2000; 13(7): 730-5.

37. Robbins, Cotran. Le basi patologiche delle malattie. VIII ed; 2010. 38. Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, et al. Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy issues in operable disease. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2008; 26(5): 814-9.

39. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) 2009; 45(2): 228-47.

40. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. Journal of clinical

oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 1998; 16(8): 2672-85.

60

41. Feldman LD, Hortobagyi GN, Buzdar AU, Ames FC, Blumenschein GR. Pathological assessment of response to induction chemotherapy in breast cancer. Cancer research 1986; 46(5): 2578-81.

42. Julius T, Kemp SE, Kneeshaw PJ, Chaturvedi A, Drew PJ, Turnbull LW. MRI and conservative treatment of locally advanced breast cancer. European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology 2005; 31(10): 1129- 34.

43. Garimella V, Qutob O, Fox JN, et al. Recurrence rates after DCE-MRI image guided planning for breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer patients. European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology 2007; 33(2): 157-61.

44. Abraham DC, Jones RC, Jones SE, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic response of locally advanced breast cancer by magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 1996; 78(1): 91-100.

45. Hieken TJ, Harrison J, Herreros J, Velasco JM. Correlating sonography, mammography, and pathology in the assessment of breast cancer size. American journal of surgery 2001; 182(4): 351-4.

46. Haraldsdottir KH, Jonsson T, Halldorsdottir AB, Tranberg KG, Asgeirsson KS. Tumor Size of Invasive Breast Cancer on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Conventional Imaging (Mammogram/Ultrasound): Comparison with Pathological Size and Clinical Implications. Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society 2017; 106(1): 68-73.

47. Meier-Meitinger M, Haberle L, Fasching PA, et al. Assessment of breast cancer tumour size using six different methods. European radiology 2011; 21(6): 1180-7.

48. Balu-Maestro C, Chapellier C, Bleuse A, Chanalet I, Chauvel C, Largillier R. Imaging in evaluation of response to neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment benefits of MRI. Breast cancer research and treatment 2002; 72(2): 145-52.

61

49. Segel MC, Paulus DD, Hortobagyi GN. Advanced primary breast cancer: assessment at mammography of response to induction chemotherapy. Radiology 1988; 169(1): 49-54.

50. Junkermann H, von Fournier D. [Imaging methods for evaluating the response of breast carcinoma to preoperative chemotherapy]. Der Radiologe 1997; 37(9): 726-32.

51. Ferranti C, Bergonzi S, Viganotti G, et al. [Microcalcifications in the diagnosis and follow-up after the primary chemotherapy of breast neoplasms]. La Radiologia medica 1992; 84(1-2): 26-31.

52. Kim YS, Chang JM, Moon HG, Lee J, Shin SU, Moon WK. Residual Mammographic Microcalcifications and Enhancing Lesions on MRI After Neoadjuvant Systemic Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Breast Cancer: Correlation with Histopathologic Residual Tumor Size. Annals of surgical oncology 2016; 23(4): 1135-42.

53. Tozaki M. Interpretation of breast MRI: correlation of kinetic and morphological parameters with pathological findings. Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2004; 3(4): 189-97.

54. Rosen EL, Blackwell KL, Baker JA, et al. Accuracy of MRI in the detection of residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR American journal of roentgenology 2003; 181(5): 1275-82.

55. Weiss A, Lee KC, Romero Y, et al. Calcifications on mammogram do not correlate with tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Annals of surgical oncology 2014; 21(10): 3310-6.

56. Ballesio L, Gigli S, Di Pastena F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging tumor regression shrinkage patterns after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer: Correlation with tumor biological subtypes and pathological response after therapy. Tumour biology : the journal of the

International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine 2017; 39(3): 1010428317694540.

62

57. Jochelson MS, Lampen-Sachar K, Gibbons G, et al. Do MRI and mammography reliably identify candidates for breast conservation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy? Annals of surgical oncology 2015; 22(5): 1490-5.