OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the relationship between rs17576 (MMP-9) polymorphism and increased cancer risk in a Brazilian breast cancer cohort. METHODS: This study included 141 women (71 breast cancer patients and 70 controls without breast cancer) who donated 3 mL of their peripheral blood for genomic DNA extraction. This DNA was then genotyped using a real-time polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The AG (rs17576) genotype was identified in 26 (18.43%) participants in the case group and in 22 (15.60%) participants in the control group (p=0.274), while the GG genotype was identified in ten (7.09%) participants in the case group and in one (0.70%) participant in the control group (p<0.003 - OR (95% CI) 13.13 (1.73, 593.08). No significant difference in the incidence rates was observed for AG or GG rs17576 genotypes in premenopausal women, p=0.813 and p=0.556, respectively. However, in postmenopausal women, the AG genotype was shown to occur in 14 (22.5%) participants in the case group and in 4 (6.45%) participants in the control (p<0.043), while GG genotype occurred in eight (12.90%) of the individuals in the case group and in none of the individuals in the control group (p<0.006). CONCLUSION: In this study, the MMP-9 rs17576 GG polymorphic variant was shown to be significantly associated with breast cancer risk in premenopausal women, while the AG and GG genotypes were associated with increased cancer risk in postmenopausal women.

OBJECTIVES: In breast cancer diagnosis, mammography (MMG), ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the imaging methods most used. There is a scarcity of comparative studies that evaluate the accuracy of these methods in the diagnosis of breast cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out through the review of electronic medical records of 32 female patients who underwent breast imaging examinations at a imaging diagnostic center in Teresina, State of Piauí, Brazil. Patients who had these three imaging methods at the time of the evaluation of the same nodule were included. The nodule must have been classified as suspect by the BI-RADS® system in at least one of the methods. Data from each method were compared with the histopathological examination. Statistical analysis used the calculation of proportions in Excel 2010. RESULTS: MMG showed 56.2%, 87.5%, 81.8%, 66.7% and 71.8% of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy, respectively. USG had 75%, 18.8%, 48%, 42.8% and 46.9% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. In turn, MRI had 100%, 50%, 66.7%, 100% and 75% of sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy, respectively. CONCLUSION: Thus, MRI and MMG were more accurate in evaluating suspicious breast lumps. MRI had a low specificity, mainly to high breast density, while MMG had also sensitivity limited due to high breast density and USG has been proven to be useful in these patients.