A meta-analysis comparing the diagnostic performance of abbreviated MRI and a full diagnostic protocol in breast cancer

Auditing Abbreviated Breast MR Imaging: Clinical Considerations and Implications

Abbreviated breast MR (AB-MR) imaging is a relatively new breast imaging tool, which maintains diagnostic accuracy while reducing image times compared with full-protocol breast MR (FP-MR) imaging. Breast imaging audits involve calculating individual and organizational metrics, which can be compared with established benchmarks, providing a standard against which performance can be measured. Unlike FP-MR imaging, there are no established benchmarks for AB-MR imaging but studies demonstrate comparable performance for cancer detection rate, positive predictive value 3, sensitivity, and specificity with T2. We review the basics of performing an audit, including strategies to implement if benchmarks are not being met.

Optimising the diagnostic accuracy of First post-contrAst SubtracTed breast MRI (FAST MRI) through interpretation-training: a multicentre e-learning study, mapping the learning curve of NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) mammogram readers using an enriched dataset

BACKGROUND

Abbreviated breast MRI (FAST MRI) is being introduced into clinical practice to screen women with mammographically dense breasts or with a personal history of breast cancer. This study aimed to optimise diagnostic accuracy through the adaptation of interpretation-training.

METHODS

A FAST MRI interpretation-training programme (short presentations and guided hands-on workstation teaching) was adapted to provide additional training during the assessment task (interpretation of an enriched dataset of 125 FAST MRI scans) by giving readers feedback about the true outcome of each scan immediately after each scan was interpreted (formative assessment). Reader interaction with the FAST MRI scans used developed software (RiViewer) that recorded reader opinions and reading times for each scan. The training programme was additionally adapted for remote e-learning delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, blinded interpretation of an enriched dataset by multiple readers.

RESULTS

43 mammogram readers completed the training, 22 who interpreted breast MRI in their clinical role (Group 1) and 21 who did not (Group 2). Overall sensitivity was 83% (95%CI 81-84%; 1994/2408), specificity 94% (95%CI 93-94%; 7806/8338), readers' agreement with the true outcome kappa = 0.75 (95%CI 0.74-0.77) and diagnostic odds ratio = 70.67 (95%CI 61.59-81.09). Group 1 readers showed similar sensitivity (84%) to Group 2 (82% p = 0.14), but slightly higher specificity (94% v. 93%, p = 0.001). Concordance with the ground truth increased significantly with the number of FAST MRI scans read through the formative assessment task (p = 0.002) but by differing amounts depending on whether or not a reader had previously attended FAST MRI training (interaction p = 0.02). Concordance with the ground truth was significantly associated with reading batch size (p = 0.02), tending to worsen when more than 50 scans were read per batch. Group 1 took a median of 56 seconds (range 8-47,466) to interpret each FAST MRI scan compared with 78 (14-22,830, p < 0.0001) for Group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Provision of immediate feedback to mammogram readers during the assessment test set reading task increased specificity for FAST MRI interpretation and achieved high diagnostic accuracy. Optimal reading-batch size for FAST MRI was 50 reads per batch. Trial registration (25/09/2019): ISRCTN16624917.

Following the High-Risk Patient: Breast Cancer Risk-Based Screening

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer occurring in women in the USA today, and accounts for more than 40,000 deaths annually (Giaquinto in CA Cancer J Clin 72: 524-541, 2022). While breast cancer survival has improved over the past decades, incidence has increased, and diagnoses are being made at younger ages. This emphasizes the importance of risk evaluation, accurate prediction, and effective mitigation and risk reduction strategies. Enhanced screening can help detect cancers at an earlier stage, thus improving morbidity and mortality. This review addresses the recognition of women at high-risk for BC and monitoring strategies for those at high risk.

Problem Solving MRI to Reduce False-Positive Biopsy Related to Breast US: Conductivity vs. DWI vs. Abbreviated Contrast-Enhanced MRI

BACKGROUND

While breast ultrasound (US) is a useful tool for diagnosing breast masses, it can entail false-positive biopsy results because of some overlapping features between benign and malignant breast masses and subjective interpretation.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the performance of conductivity imaging for reducing false-positive biopsy results related to breast US, as compared to diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and abbreviated MRI consisting of one pre- and one post-contrast T1-weighted imaging.

STUDY TYPE

Prospective.

SUBJECTS

Seventy-nine women (median age, 44 years) with 86 Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4 masses as detected by breast US.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

3-T, T2-weighted turbo spin echo sequence, DWI, and abbreviated contrast-enhanced MRI (T1-weighted gradient echo sequence).

ASSESSMENT

US-guided biopsy (reference standard) was obtained on the same day as MRI. The maximum and mean conductivity parameters from whole and single regions of interest (ROIs) were measured. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were obtained from an area with the lowest signal within a lesion on the ADC map. The performance of conductivity, ADC, and abbreviated MRI for reducing false-positive biopsies was evaluated using the following criteria: lowest conductivity and highest ADC values among malignant breast lesions and BI-RADS categories 2 or 3 on abbreviated MRI.

STATISTICAL TESTS

One conductivity parameter with the maximum area under the curve (AUC) from receiver operating characteristics was selected. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

US-guided biopsy revealed 65 benign lesions and 21 malignant lesions. The mean conductivity parameter of the single ROI method was selected (AUC = 0.74). Considering conductivity (≤0.10 S/m), ADC (≥1.60 × 10-3  mm2 /sec), and BI-RADS categories 2 or 3 reduced false-positive biopsies by 23% (15 of 65), 38% (25 of 65), and 43% (28 of 65), respectively, without missing malignant lesions.

DATA CONCLUSION

Conductivity imaging may show lower performance than DWI and abbreviated MRI in reducing unnecessary biopsies.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Abbreviated Breast MRI: State of the Art

Abbreviated MRI is an umbrella term, defined as a focused MRI examination tailored to answer a single specific clinical question. For abbreviated breast MRI, this question is: "Is there evidence of breast cancer?" Abbreviated MRI of the breast makes maximum use of the fact that the kinetics of breast cancers and of benign tissue differ most in the very early postcontrast phase; therefore, abbreviated breast MRI focuses on this period. The different published approaches to abbreviated MRI include the following three subtypes: (a) short protocols, consisting of a precontrast and either a single postcontrast acquisition (first postcontrast subtracted [FAST]) or a time-resolved series of postcontrast acquisitions with lower spatial resolution (ultrafast [UF]), obtained during the early postcontrast phase immediately after contrast agent injection; (b) abridged protocols, consisting of FAST or UF acquisitions plus selected additional pulse sequences; and (c) noncontrast protocols, where diffusion-weighted imaging replaces the contrast information. Abbreviated MRI was proposed to increase tolerability of and access to breast MRI as a screening tool. But its widening application now includes follow-up after breast cancer and even diagnostic assessment. This review defines the three subtypes of abbreviated MRI, highlighting the differences between the protocols and their clinical implications and summarizing the respective evidence on diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility.

Revisiting Screening in Women With a Family History of Breast Cancer

Women with a family history (FH) of breast cancer and without known genetic susceptibility represent a unique population whose lifetime probability of developing breast cancer varies widely depending on familial factors, breast density, and the risk assessment tool used. Recently updated guidelines from the American College of Radiology recommend supplemental annual screening with contrast-enhanced MRI or contrast-enhanced mammography for women with an FH who are high risk (≥20% lifetime risk) or have dense breasts. To date, most screening studies addressing outcomes in women with FH have largely included those also with confirmed or suspected gene mutations, in whom the lifetime risk is highest, with limited data for women at average to intermediate risk who are not known to be genetically susceptible and may not benefit as much from the same screening approaches. Further research focusing specifically on women with FH as the only breast cancer risk factor is warranted to refine risk assessment and optimize a multimodality personalized screening approach.

The cost-effectiveness of risk-stratified breast cancer screening in the UK

BACKGROUND

There has been growing interest in the UK and internationally of risk-stratified breast screening whereby individualised risk assessment may inform screening frequency, starting age, screening instrument used, or even decisions not to screen. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of eight proposals for risk-stratified screening regimens compared to both the current UK screening programme and no national screening.

METHODS

A person-level microsimulation model was developed to estimate health-related quality of life, cancer survival and NHS costs over the lifetime of the female population eligible for screening in the UK.

RESULTS

Compared with both the current screening programme and no screening, risk-stratified regimens generated additional costs and QALYs, and had a larger net health benefit. The likelihood of the current screening programme being the optimal scenario was less than 1%. No screening amongst the lowest risk group, and triannual, biennial and annual screening amongst the three higher risk groups was the optimal screening strategy from those evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that risk-stratified breast cancer screening has the potential to be beneficial for women at the population level, but the net health benefit will depend on the particular risk-based strategy.

New Approaches and Recommendations for Risk-Adapted Breast Cancer Screening

Population-based breast cancer screening using mammography as the gold standard imaging modality has been in clinical practice for over 40 years. However, the limitations of mammography in terms of sensitivity and high false-positive rates, particularly in high-risk women, challenge the indiscriminate nature of population-based screening. Additionally, in light of expanding research on new breast cancer risk factors, there is a growing consensus that breast cancer screening should move toward a risk-adapted approach. Recent advancements in breast imaging technology, including contrast material-enhanced mammography (CEM), ultrasound (US) (automated-breast US, Doppler, elastography US), and especially magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (abbreviated, ultrafast, and contrast-agent free), may provide new opportunities for risk-adapted personalized screening strategies. Moreover, the integration of artificial intelligence and radiomics techniques has the potential to enhance the performance of risk-adapted screening. This review article summarizes the current evidence and challenges in breast cancer screening and highlights potential future perspectives for various imaging techniques in a risk-adapted breast cancer screening approach. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 1. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.

Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Higher-Than-Average Risk: Updated Recommendations From the ACR

Early detection decreases breast cancer death. The ACR recommends annual screening beginning at age 40 for women of average risk and earlier and/or more intensive screening for women at higher-than-average risk. For most women at higher-than-average risk, the supplemental screening method of choice is breast MRI. Women with genetics-based increased risk, those with a calculated lifetime risk of 20% or more, and those exposed to chest radiation at young ages are recommended to undergo MRI surveillance starting at ages 25 to 30 and annual mammography (with a variable starting age between 25 and 40, depending on the type of risk). Mutation carriers can delay mammographic screening until age 40 if annual screening breast MRI is performed as recommended. Women diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 or with personal histories of breast cancer and dense breasts should undergo annual supplemental breast MRI. Others with personal histories, and those with atypia at biopsy, should strongly consider MRI screening, especially if other risk factors are present. For women with dense breasts who desire supplemental screening, breast MRI is recommended. For those who qualify for but cannot undergo breast MRI, contrast-enhanced mammography or ultrasound could be considered. All women should undergo risk assessment by age 25, especially Black women and women of Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, so that those at higher-than-average risk can be identified and appropriate screening initiated.

Comparative Performance of Contrast-enhanced Mammography, Abbreviated Breast MRI, and Standard Breast MRI for Breast Cancer Screening

Background Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and abbreviated breast MRI (ABMRI) are emerging alternatives to standard MRI for supplemental breast cancer screening. Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of CEM, ABMRI, and standard MRI. Materials and Methods This single-institution, prospective, blinded reader study included female participants referred for breast MRI from January 2018 to June 2021. CEM was performed within 14 days of standard MRI; ABMRI was produced from standard MRI images. Two readers independently interpreted each CEM and ABMRI after a washout period. Examination-level performance metrics calculated were recall rate, cancer detection, and false-positive biopsy recommendation rates per 1000 examinations and sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation. Bootstrap and permutation tests were used to calculate 95% CIs and compare modalities. Results Evaluated were 492 paired CEM and ABMRI interpretations from 246 participants (median age, 51 years; IQR, 43-61 years). On 49 MRI scans with lesions recommended for biopsy, nine lesions showed malignant pathology. No differences in ABMRI and standard MRI performance were identified. Compared with standard MRI, CEM demonstrated significantly lower recall rate (14.0% vs 22.8%; difference, -8.7%; 95% CI: -14.0, -3.5), lower false-positive biopsy recommendation rate per 1000 examinations (65.0 vs 162.6; difference, -97.6; 95% CI: -146.3, -50.8), and higher specificity (87.8% vs 80.2%; difference, 7.6%; 95% CI: 2.3, 13.1). Compared with standard MRI, CEM had significantly lower cancer detection rate (22.4 vs 36.6; difference, -14.2; 95% CI: -28.5, -2.0) and sensitivity (61.1% vs 100%; difference, -38.9%; 95% CI: -66.7, -12.5). The performance differences between CEM and ABMRI were similar to those observed between CEM and standard MRI. Conclusion ABMRI had comparable performance to standard MRI and may support more efficient MRI screening. CEM had lower recall and higher specificity compared with standard MRI or ABMRI, offset by lower cancer detection rate and sensitivity compared with standard MRI. These trade-offs warrant further consideration of patient population characteristics before widespread screening with CEM. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03517813 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.

A three-sequence dynamic contrast enhanced abbreviated MRI protocol to evaluate response to breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy

PURPOSE

To develop an ABP-MRI to evaluate response to NAC for invasive breast carcinoma.

STUDY TYPE

A single-center, cross-sectional study.

SUBJECTS

A consecutive series of 210 women with invasive breast carcinoma who underwent breast MRI after NAC between 2016 and 2020.

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

1.5 T / Dynamic contrast-enhanced.

ASSESSMENT

MRI scans were independently reevaluated, with access to dynamic contrast-enhanced without contrast and to the first, second, and third post-contrast time (ABP-MRI 1-3).

STATISTICAL TESTS

The diagnostic performance of the ABP-MRIs and the Full protocol (FP-MRI) were analyzed. The Wilcoxon non-parametric test (p-value <0.050) was used to compare the capability in measuring the most extensive residual lesion.

RESULTS

The median age was 47 (24-80) years. ABP-MRI 1 showed higher specificity (84.6%; 77/91) but a higher probability of false-negatives (16.8%) and lower sensitivity (83.2%; 99/119) than ABP-MRI 2,3 and the FP-MRI, which were identical in specificity (81.3%; 74/91), probability of false-negatives (8.4%), and sensitivity (91.6%; 109/119). ABP-MRI 2 showed a mean underestimation of only 0.03 cm in the measurement of the longest axis of the residual lesion (p = 0.008) with an average reduction in the acquisition time of 75%, compared with the FP-MRI.

CONCLUSION

ABP-MRI 2 showed diagnostic performance equivalent to the FP-MRI with a 75% reduction in the acquisition time.

Implementation of abbreviated breast MRI in diagnostic and screening settings

BACKGROUND

Abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) includes fewer sequences than standard MRI, which could be utilized for breast cancer detection.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of abbreviated MRI protocol in screening and diagnostic settings.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All women with screening and diagnostic (problem-solving and preoperative staging) MRI examination were recruited from 2017 to 2020. Two expert radiologists assessed designed abbreviated protocol (fat-saturated T1-weighted [T1W] pre-contrast and two first fat-saturated T1W post-contrast series with reconstruction of their subtraction) including maximum intensity projection (MIP) and then evaluated standard protocol of breast MRI. Associated findings, including axillary lymphadenopathy and invasion to nipple, skin, or pectoralis muscle were also evaluated. The concordance rate of abbreviated with standard protocol in screening and diagnostic settings were also compared, based on BI-RADS classification. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 108 (26.5%) of 408 patients (mean age = 43 ± 9 years) were classified as BI-RADS 4-5 and considered positive findings based on suspicious enhancement (mass or non-mass enhancement). Compared to standard protocol, abbreviated protocol revealed >98% accuracy in the diagnostic setting as well as 100% accuracy in the screening setting. Concordance rates in screening and diagnostic settings were 99.6% and 98.1%, respectively. There was no discordance between abbreviated and standard protocol in the evaluation of associated findings.

CONCLUSION

Abbreviated MRI protocol possesses substantial diagnostic accuracy in both screening and diagnostic settings. Additional information provided by standard protocol might not require for cancer detection.

Challenges and Changes of the Breast Cancer Screening Paradigm

Since four decades mammography is used for early breast cancer detection in asymptomatic women and still remains the gold standard imaging modality. However, population screening programs can be personalized and women can be divided into different groups based on risk factors and personal preferences. The availability of new and evolving imaging modalities, for example, digital breast tomosynthesis, dynamic-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), abbreviated MRI protocols, diffusion-weighted MRI, and contrast-enhanced mammography leads to new challenges and perspectives regarding the feasibility and potential harms of breast cancer screening. The aim of this review is to discuss the current guidelines for different risk groups, to analyze the recent published studies about the diagnostic performance of the imaging modalities and to discuss new developments and future perspectives. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 6.

Breast MRI: an illustration of benign findings

Despite its unparalleled sensitivity for aggressive breast cancer, breast MRI continually excites criticism for a specificity that lags behind that of modern mammographic techniques. Radiologists reporting breast MRI need to recognise the range of benign appearances on breast MRI to avoid unnecessary biopsy. This review summarises the reported diagnostic accuracy of breast MRI with particular attention to the technique's specificity, provides a referenced reporting strategy and discusses factors that compromise diagnostic confidence. We then present a pictorial review of benign findings on breast MRI. Enhancing radiological skills to discriminate malignant from benign findings will minimise false positive biopsies, enabling optimal use of multiparametric breast MRI for the benefit of screening clients and breast cancer patients.

Assessment of Enhancement Kinetics Improves the Specificity of Abbreviated Breast MRI: Performance in an Enriched Cohort

Objective: To investigate the added value of kinetic information for breast lesion evaluation on abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI). Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 207 breast lesions with Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories 3, 4, or 5 on AB-MRI in 198 consecutive patients who had breast MRI for screening after breast cancer surgery between January 2017 and December 2019. All lesions were pathologically confirmed or stable on follow-up images for 2 years or more. Kinetic information of the lesions regarding the degree and rate of enhancement on the first post-contrast-enhanced image and the enhancement curve type from two post-contrast-enhanced images were analyzed on a commercially available computer-assisted diagnosis system. The diagnostic performances of AB-MRI with morphological analysis alone and with the addition of kinetic information were compared using the McNemar test. Results: Of 207 lesions, 59 (28.5%) were malignant and 148 (71.5%) were benign. The addition of an enhancement degree of ≥90% to the morphological analysis significantly increased the specificity of AB-MRI (29.7% vs. 52.7%, p < 0.001) without significantly reducing the sensitivity (94.9% vs. 89.8%, p = 0.083) compared to morphological analysis alone. Unnecessary biopsy could have been avoided in 34 benign lesions, although three malignant lesions could have been missed. For detecting invasive cancer, adding an enhancement degree ≥107% to the morphological analysis significantly increased the specificity (26.5% vs. 57.6%, p < 0.001) without significantly decreasing the sensitivity (94.6% vs. 86.5%, p = 0.083). Conclusion: Adding the degree of enhancement on the first post-contrast-enhanced image to the morphological analysis resulted in higher AB-MRI specificity without compromising its sensitivity.

Abbreviated Molecular Breast Imaging: Feasibility and Future Considerations

OBJECTIVE

Molecular breast imaging (MBI) is a supplemental screening modality consistently demonstrating incremental cancer detection over mammography alone; however, its lengthy duration may limit widespread utilization. The study purpose was to assess feasibility of an abbreviated MBI protocol, providing readers with mediolateral oblique (MLO) projections only and assessing performance in lesion detection and localization.

METHODS

Retrospective IRB-exempt blinded reader study administered to 5 fellowship-trained breast imaging radiologists. Independent reads performed for 124 screening MBI cases, half abnormal and half negative/normal. Readers determined whether an abnormality was present, side of abnormality, and location of abnormality (medial/lateral). Abnormal cases had confirmatory biopsy or surgical pathology; normal cases had imaging follow-up ensuring true negative results. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated to assess performance. A false negative result indicated that a reader failed to detect abnormal uptake; a false positive result indicated a reader incorrectly called an abnormality for a negative case. Tests for association included chi-square, Fisher-exact, and analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Mean reader performance for detecting abnormal uptake: sensitivity 96.8%, specificity 98.7%, PPV 98.8%, and NPV 96.9%. Accuracy in localizing lesions to the medial or lateral breast was 100%. There were no associations in reader performance with reader experience, reader technique, lesion morphology, or lesion pathology. Median lesion size was 1.0 cm (range: 0.4-8.0 cm). All readers correctly identified 97.7% (42/43) of lesions with malignant or elevated risk pathology.

CONCLUSION

An abbreviated MBI protocol (MLO images only) maintained high accuracy in lesion detection and localization.

ESO-ESMO fifth international consensus guidelines for breast cancer in young women (BCY5)

We dedicate this manuscript in memory of a dear friend and colleague Bella Kaufman. The fifth International Consensus Symposium for Breast Cancer in Young Women (BCY5) took place virtually in October 2020, organized by the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO). Consensus recommendations for the management of breast cancer in young women were updated from BCY4 with incorporation of new evidence to inform the guidelines. Areas of research priorities as well as specificities in different geographic and minority populations were identified. This manuscript summarizes the ESO-ESMO international consensus recommendations, which are also endorsed by the European Society of Breast Specialists (EUSOMA).

Abbreviated Breast MRI Utilization: A Survey of the Society of Breast Imaging

OBJECTIVE

To survey Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) membership on their use of abbreviated breast MRI to understand variability in practice patterns.

METHODS

A survey was developed by the SBI Patient Care and Delivery committee for distribution to SBI membership in July and August 2021. Eighteen questions queried practice demographics and then abbreviated breast MRI practices regarding initial adoption, scheduling and finances, MRI protocols, and interpretations. Comparisons between responses were made by practice demographics.

RESULTS

There were 321 respondents (response rate: 15.3%), of whom 25% (81/321) currently offer and 26% (84/321) plan to offer abbreviated breast MRI. Practices in the South (37/107, 35%) and Midwest (22/70, 31%) were more likely to offer abbreviated MRI (P = 0.005). Practices adopted many strategies to raise awareness, most directed at referring providers. The mean charge to patients was $414, and only 6% of practices offer financial support. The median time slot for studies is 20 minutes, with only 15% of practices using block scheduling of consecutive breast MRIs. Regarding MRI protocols, 64% (37/58) of respondents included only a single first-pass post-contrast sequence, and 90% (52/58) included T2-weighted sequences. Patient eligibility was highly varied, and a majority of respondents (37/58, 64%) do not provide any recommendations for screening intervals in non-high-risk women.

CONCLUSION

Abbreviated breast MRI utilization is growing rapidly, and practices are applying a variety of strategies to facilitate adoption. Although there is notable variability in patient eligibility, follow-up intervals, and costs, there is some agreement regarding abbreviated breast MRI protocols.

Evaluating the effectiveness of abbreviated breast MRI (abMRI) interpretation training for mammogram readers: a multi-centre study assessing diagnostic performance, using an enriched dataset

Background

Abbreviated breast MRI (abMRI) is being introduced in breast screening trials and clinical practice, particularly for women with dense breasts. Upscaling abMRI provision requires the workforce of mammogram readers to learn to effectively interpret abMRI.

The purpose of this study was to examine the diagnostic accuracy of mammogram readers to interpret abMRI after a single day of standardised small-group training and to compare diagnostic performance of mammogram readers experienced in full-protocol breast MRI (fpMRI) interpretation (Group 1) with that of those without fpMRI interpretation experience (Group 2).

Methods

Mammogram readers were recruited from six NHS Breast Screening Programme sites. Small-group hands-on workstation training was provided, with subsequent prospective, independent, blinded interpretation of an enriched dataset with known outcome. A simplified form of abMRI (first post-contrast subtracted images (FAST MRI), displayed as maximum-intensity projection (MIP) and subtracted slice stack) was used. Per-breast and per-lesion diagnostic accuracy analysis was undertaken, with comparison across groups, and double-reading simulation of a consecutive screening subset.

Results

37 readers (Group 1: 17, Group 2: 20) completed the reading task of 125 scans (250 breasts) (total = 9250 reads). Overall sensitivity was 86% (95% confidence interval (CI) 84–87%; 1776/2072) and specificity 86% (95%CI 85–86%; 6140/7178). Group 1 showed significantly higher sensitivity (843/952; 89%; 95%CI 86–91%) and higher specificity (2957/3298; 90%; 95%CI 89–91%) than Group 2 (sensitivity = 83%; 95%CI 81–85% (933/1120) p < 0.0001; specificity = 82%; 95%CI 81–83% (3183/3880) p < 0.0001). Inter-reader agreement was higher for Group 1 (kappa = 0.73; 95%CI 0.68–0.79) than for Group 2 (kappa = 0.51; 95%CI 0.45–0.56). Specificity improved for Group 2, from the first 55 cases (81%) to the remaining 70 (83%) (p = 0.02) but not for Group 1 (90–89% p = 0.44), whereas sensitivity remained consistent for both Group 1 (88–89%) and Group 2 (83–84%).

Conclusions

Single-day abMRI interpretation training for mammogram readers achieved an overall diagnostic performance within benchmarks published for fpMRI but was insufficient for diagnostic accuracy of mammogram readers new to breast MRI to match that of experienced fpMRI readers. Novice MRI reader performance improved during the reading task, suggesting that additional training could further narrow this performance gap.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13058-022-01549-5.

Abbreviated Screening MRI for Women with a History of Breast Cancer: Comparison with Full-Protocol Breast MRI

Background Few studies have compared abbreviated breast MRI with full-protocol MRI in women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC), and they have not adjusted for confounding variables. Purpose To compare abbreviated breast MRI with full-protocol MRI in women with PHBC by using propensity score matching to adjust for confounding variables. Materials and Methods In this single-center retrospective study, women with PHBC who underwent full-protocol MRI (January 2008-August 2017) or abbreviated MRI (September 2017-April 2019) were identified. With use of a propensity score-matched cohort, screening performances were compared between the two MRI groups with the McNemar test or a propensity score-adjusted generalized estimating equation. The coprimary analyses were sensitivity and specificity. The secondary analyses were the cancer detection rate, interval cancer rate, positive predictive value for biopsies performed (PPV3), and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 3 short-term follow-up rate. Results There were 726 women allocated to each MRI group (mean age ± SD, 50 years ± 8 for both groups). Abbreviated MRI and full-protocol MRI showed comparable sensitivity (15 of 15 cancers [100%; 95% CI: 78, 100] vs nine of 13 cancers [69%; 95% CI: 39, 91], respectively; P = .17). Abbreviated MRI showed higher specificity than full-protocol MRI (660 of 711 examinations [93%; 95% CI: 91, 95] vs 612 of 713 examinations [86%; 95% CI: 83, 88], respectively; P < .001). The cancer detection rate (21 vs 12 per 1000 examinations), interval cancer rate (0 vs five per 1000 examinations), and PPV3 (61% [14 of 23 examinations] vs 41% [nine of 22 examinations]) were comparable (all P < .05). The BI-RADS category 3 short-term follow-up rate of abbreviated MRI was less than half that of full-protocol MRI (5% [36 of 726 examinations] vs 12% [84 of 726 examinations], respectively; P < .001). Ninety-three percent (14 of 15) of cancers detected at abbreviated MRI were node-negative T1-invasive cancers (n = 6) or ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 8). Conclusion Abbreviated breast MRI showed comparable sensitivity and superior specificity to full-protocol MRI in breast cancer detection in women with a personal history of breast cancer. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

A Concise Review on the Utilization of Abbreviated Protocol Breast MRI over Full Diagnostic Protocol in Breast Cancer Detection

Breast MRI possesses high sensitivity for detecting breast cancer among the current clinical modalities and is an indispensable imaging practice. Breast MRI comprises diffusion-weighted imaging, ultrafast, and T2 weighted and T1 weighted CE (contrast-enhanced) imaging that may be utilized for improving the characterization of the lesions. This multimodal evaluation of breast lesions enables outstanding discrimination between the malignant and benign and malignant lesions. The expanding indications of breast MRI confirm the far superiority of MRI in preoperative staging, especially in the estimation of tumour size and identifying tumour foci in the contralateral and ipsilateral breast. Recent studies depicted that experts can meritoriously utilize this tool for improving breast cancer surgery despite their existence of no significant long term outcomes. For managing the, directly and indirectly, associated screening cost, abbreviated protocols are found to be more beneficial. Further, in some of the patients who were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, breast MRI is utilized for documenting response. It is therefore essential to realise that oncological screening must be easily available, cost-effective, and time-consuming. Earlier detection of this short sequence protocol leads to prior and early breast cancer disease in high risky female populations like women with dense breasts, prehistoric evidence, etc. This proper utilization of AP reduces unnecessary mastectomies. Hence, this review focused on the explorative information for strongly suggesting the benefits of AP breast MRI compared to full diagnostic protocol MRI.

Small lesion classification on abbreviated breast MRI: training can improve diagnostic performance and inter-reader agreement

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the diagnostic performance and inter-reader agreement for small lesion classification on abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) can be improved by training, and can achieve the level of full diagnostic protocol MRI (FDP-MRI).

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 1165 breast lesions (≤ 2 cm; 409 malignant and 756 benign) from 1165 MRI examinations for reading test. Twelve radiologists were assigned into a trained group and a non-trained group. They interpreted each AB-MRI twice, which was extracted from FDP-MRI. After the first read, the trained group received a structured training for AB-MRI interpretation while the non-trained group did not. FDP-MRIs were interpreted by the trained group after the second read. BI-RADS category for each lesion was compared to the standard of reference (histopathological examination or follow-up) to calculate diagnostic accuracy. Inter-reader agreement was assessed using multirater k analysis. Diagnostic accuracy and inter-reader agreement were compared between the trained and non-trained groups, between the first and second reads, and between AB-MRI and FDP-MRI.

RESULTS

After training, the diagnostic accuracy of AB-MRI increased from 77.6 to 84.4%, and inter-reader agreement improved from 0.410 to 0.579 (both p < 0.001), which were higher than those of the non-trained group (accuracy, 84.4% vs 78.0%; weighted k, 0.579 vs 0.461; both p < 0.001). The post-training accuracy and inter-reader agreement of AB-MRI were lower than those of FDP-MRI (accuracy, 84.4% vs 92.8%; weighted k, 0.579 vs 0.602; both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Training can improve the diagnostic performance and inter-reader agreement for small lesion classification on AB-MRI; however, it remains inferior to those of FDP-MRI.

KEY POINTS

• Training can improve the diagnostic performance for small breast lesions on AB-MRI. • Training can reduce inter-observer variation for breast lesion classification on AB-MRI, especially among junior radiologists. • The post-training diagnostic performance and inter-reader agreement of AB-MRI remained inferior to those of FDP-MRI.

MRI Screening of BRCA Mutation Carriers: Comparison of Standard Protocol and Abbreviated Protocols With and Without T2-Weighted Images

Background: Increasing evidence supports the role of abbreviated MRI protocols for breast cancer detection. However, abbreviated protocols have been poorly studied in patients who are BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Further, the need for T2-weighted (T2W) sequences in abbreviated protocols remains controversial. Objective: To compare the diagnostic performance of a standard full breast MRI protocol and of abbreviated protocols with and without inclusion of the T2W sequence in patients with BRCA mutations. Methods: This retrospective study included a total of 292 patients (mean age, 47.9 years) who were BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers and who underwent a total of 427 screening breast MRI examinations using a standard full protocol that could be classified as having benign (n=407) or malignant (n=20) findings based on histopathology or imaging follow-up. Four readers independently assessed examinations in three separate sessions [theoretical abbreviated protocol (which included the first postcontrast acquisition), theoretical abbreviated protocol with addition of T2W sequence, and the standard full protocol], assigning BI-RADS categories. Categories of 3-5 were considered to represent positive examinations. Interreader agreement was assessed, and diagnostic performance was compared using pooled reader data. Results: Interreader agreement for BI-RADS category, expressed as kappa, was 0.55 for standard, 0.45 for abbreviated, and 0.57 for abbreviated+T2. Pooled sensitivity was 94% for standard, 92% for abbreviated, and 90% for abbreviated+T2 (all p>.001). Pooled specificity was 80% for standard, 71% for abbreviated, and 83% for abbreviated+ T2 (p<.001 for abbreviated+T2 compared with both standard and abbreviated). Pooled PPV was 19% for standard, 14% for abbreviated, and 20% for abbreviated+T2 (p<.001 for abbreviated compared with both standard and abbreviated). Pooled NPV was 100% for standard, 99% for abbreviated, and 99% for abbreviated+T2 (all p>.001). Pooled accuracy was 80% for standard, 73% for abbreviated, and 83% for abbreviated+T2 (p<.001 for abbreviated compared with both standard and abbreviated+T2). Conclusion: The abbreviated protocol without T2W images had suboptimal performance. However, addition of T2W sequence yielded comparable sensitivity and accuracy, and small increase in specificity, compared with the full protocol. Clinical Impact: The findings support implementation of abbreviated MRI with T2W imaging for breast cancer screening in patients with BRCA mutations.

Opportunities in cancer imaging: risk-adapted breast imaging in screening

In the UK, women between 50-70 years are invited for 3-yearly mammography screening irrespective of their likelihood of developing breast cancer. The only risk adaption is for women with >30% lifetime risk who are offered annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography, and annual mammography for some moderate-risk women. Using questionnaires, breast density, and polygenic risk scores, it is possible to stratify the population into the lowest 20% risk, who will develop <4% of cancers and the top 4%, who will develop 18% of cancers. Mammography is a good screening test but has low sensitivity of 60% in the 9% of women with the highest category of breast density (BIRADS D) who have a 2.5- to fourfold breast cancer risk. There is evidence that adding ultrasound to the screening mammogram can increase the cancer detection rate and reduce advanced stage interval and next round cancers. Similarly, alternative tests such as contrast-enhanced mammography (CESM) or abbreviated MRI (ABB-MRI) are much more effective in detecting cancer in women with dense breasts. Scintimammography has been shown to be a viable alternative for dense breasts or for follow-up in those with a personal history of breast cancer and scarring as result of treatment. For supplemental screening to be worthwhile in these women, new technologies need to reduce the number of stage II cancers and be cost effective when tested in large scale trials. This article reviews the evidence for supplemental imaging and examines whether a risk-stratified approach is feasible.

What's Hot in Breast MRI

Several articles in the literature have demonstrated a promising role for breast MRI techniques that are more economic in total exam time than others when used as supplement to mammography for detection and diagnosis of breast cancer. There are many technical factors that must be considered in the shortened breast MRI protocols to cut down time of standard ones, including using optimal fat suppression, gadolinium-chelates intravascular contrast administrations for dynamic imaging with post processing subtractions and maximum intensity projections (MIP) high spatial and temporal resolution among others. Multiparametric breast MRI that includes both gadolinium-dependent, i.e., dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE-MRI) and gadolinium-free techniques, i.e., diffusion-weighted/diffusion-tensor magnetic resonance imaging (DWI/DTI) are shown by several investigators that can provide extremely high sensitivity and specificity for detection of breast cancer. This article provides an overview of the proven indications for breast MRI including breast cancer screening for higher than average risk, determining chemotherapy induced tumor response, detecting residual tumor after incomplete surgical excision, detecting occult cancer in patients presenting with axillary node metastasis, detecting residual tumor after incomplete breast cancer surgical excision, detecting cancer when results of conventional imaging are equivocal, as well patients suspicious of having breast implant rupture. Despite having the highest sensitivity for breast cancer detection, there are pitfalls, however, secondary to false positive and false negative contrast enhancement and contrast-free MRI techniques. Awareness of the strengths and limitations of different approaches to obtain state of the art MR images of the breast will facilitate the work-up of patients with suspicious breast lesions.

Implementation of Abbreviated Breast MRI for Screening: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) is being rapidly adopted to harness the high sensitivity of screening MRI while addressing issues related to access, cost, and workflow. The successful implementation of an ABI-MRI program requires collaboration across administrative, operational, financial, technical, and clinical providers. Institutions must be thoughtful in defining AB-MRI patient eligibility and providing recommendations for screening intervals, as existing practices are heterogeneous. Similarly, there is no universally accepted AB-MRI protocol, though guiding principles should harmonize abbreviated and full protocols while being mindful of scan duration and table time. The interpretation of AB-MRI will be a new experience for many radiologists and may require a phased rollout as well as a careful audit of performance metrics over time to ensure benchmark metrics are achieved. AB-MRI finances, which are driven by patient self-payment, will require buy-in from hospital administration with the recognition that downstream revenues will be needed to support initial costs. Finally, successful startup of an AB-MRI program requires active engagement with the larger community of patients and referring providers. As AB-MRI becomes more widely accepted and available, best practices and community standards will continue to evolve to ensure high quality patient care.

Abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: A systematic review of literature

BACKGROUND

: magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been increasingly used to study breast cancer for screening high-risk cases, pre-operative staging, and problem-solving because of its high sensitivity. However, its cost-effectiveness is still debated. Thus, the concept of abbreviated MRI (ABB-MRI) protocols was proposed as a possible solution for reducing MRI costs.

PURPOSE

: to investigate the role of the abbreviated MRI protocols in detecting and staging breast cancer.

METHODS

: a systematic search of the literature was carried out in the bibliographic databases: Scopus, PubMed, Medline, and Science Direct.

RESULTS

: forty-one articles were included, which described results of the assessment of fifty-three abbreviated protocols for screening, staging, recurrence assessing, and problem-solving or clarification.

CONCLUSIONS

: the use of ABB-MRI protocols allows reducing the acquisition and reading times, maintaining a high concordance with the final interpretation, in comparison to a complete protocol. However, larger prospective and multicentre trials are necessary to validate the performance in specific clinical environments.