28 Case Series: Imaging Appearance of Non–Breast Cancer Solid Masses in the Male Breast

, , , ,
Miami Breast Cancer Conference® Abstracts Supplement, 39th Annual Miami Breast Cancer Conference® - Abstracts, Volume 36, Issue suppl 3
Pages: 26


Benign-appearing masses in male patients should be approached thoughtfully, given the overlapping morphologic features of benign and malignant tumors. In addition to gynecomastia, other benign male breast tumors include lipoma, pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia, granular cell tumor, fibromatosis, myofibroblastoma, schwannoma, and hemangioma.1 Diseases in the male breast can affect any component of the normal breast anatomy, including the skin, subcutaneous fat, stroma, glands, neurovascular structures, and lymphatic vessels. Typically, fat makes up most of the breast volume in men, with few residual ducts and stroma due to involution and atrophy from androgenic antagonistic effects.2

Learning Objectives

Present cases of male patients presenting with solid breast masses as well as the radiologic and clinical management.

Abstract Content

This is a case series of 12 solid breast masses identified in male patients who did not receive a breast cancer diagnosis. We will discuss the patient presentation, imaging findings, and histopathological appearance. Surgical or clinical management recommendations, when available, will also be presented.


Solid breast masses in male patients should be evaluated thoroughly to exclude malignancy, given the overlapping features of benign and malignant tumors. This could include clinical evaluation and thorough history, imaging and/or tissue sampling, and possible surgical consultation and/or excision.


  1. Nguyen C, Kettler MD, Swirsky ME, et al. Male breast disease: pictorial review with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2013;33(3):763-779. doi:10.1148/rg.333125137
  2. Lattin GE Jr, Jesinger RA, Mattu R, Glassman LM. From the radiologic pathology archives: diseases of the male breast: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2013;33(2):461-489. doi:10.1148/rg.332125208