The Problem of Mammographic Breast Density - The Position of the DEGUM Working Group on Breast Ultrasound

A scoping review of programme specific mammographic breast density related guidelines and practices within breast screening programmes

INTRODUCTION

High mammographic breast density (MBD) is an independent breast cancer risk factor. In organised breast screening settings, discussions are ongoing regarding the optimal clinical role of MBD to help guide screening decisions. The aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview of current practices incorporating MBD within population-based breast screening programmes and from professional organisations internationally.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the framework proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The electronic databases, MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched. Grey literature sources, websites of international breast screening programmes, and relevant government organisations were searched to identify further relevant literature. Data from identified materials were extracted and presented as a narrative summary.

RESULTS

The search identified 78 relevant documents. Documents were identified for breast screening programmes in 18 countries relating to screening intervals for women with dense breasts, MBD measurement, reporting, notification, and guiding supplemental screening. Documents were identified from 18 international professional organisations with the majority of material relating to supplemental screening guidance for women with dense breasts. Key factors collated during the data extraction process as relevant considerations for MBD practices included the evidence base needed to inform decision-making processes and resources (healthcare system costs, radiology equipment, and workforce planning).

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review summarises current practices and guidelines incorporating MBD in international population-based breast screening settings and highlights the absence of consensus between organised breast screening programmes incorporating MBD in current breast screening protocols.

Best Practice Guideline - DEGUM Recommendations on Breast Ultrasound

For many years, breast ultrasound has been used in addition to mammography as an important method for clarifying breast findings. However, differences in the interpretation of findings continue to be problematic 1 2. These differences decrease the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound after detection of a finding and complicate interdisciplinary communication and the comparison of scientific studies 3. In 1999, the American College of Radiology (ACR) created a working group (International Expert Working Group) that developed a classification system for ultrasound examinations based on the established BI-RADS classification of mammographic findings under consideration of literature data 4. Due to differences in content, the German Society for Ultrasound in Medicine (DEGUM) published its own BI-RADS-analogue criteria catalog in 2006 3. In addition to the persistence of differences in content, there is also an issue with formal licensing with the current 5th edition of the ACR BI-RADS catalog, even though the content is recognized by the DEGUM as another system for describing and documenting findings. The goal of the Best Practice Guideline of the Breast Ultrasound Working Group of the DEGUM is to provide colleagues specialized in senology with a current catalog of ultrasound criteria and assessment categories as well as best practice recommendations for the various ultrasound modalities.

[Diagnosis of breast diseases in a certified breast center]

The beginning of the 21st century has seen immense improvements in the quality of diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer due to several, simultaneous developments. In particular, the introduction of a certification program from the German Cancer Society based on level III guidelines has enhanced the transparency and quality of treatment of breast diseases for all actors. As a result, patients have benefited from intensified cooperation especially between core disciplines in breast disease, gynecology, pathology, and radiology. The standardized and synoptic reading of multiple diagnostic modalities has enabled precise sampling of histologic specimen, which has improved prognosis and the successful individualization of therapy. In this article the benefits of breast cancer diagnosis and therapy in a certified breast center are illustrated using four case examples.

Analysis of the causes of false negative and false positive results of preoperative axillary ultrasound in patients with early breast cancer - a single-centre study

Introduction

Properly planned and performed diagnostic tests allow the optimal treatment option to be chosen for the patient. They also allow qualification for the correct surgical procedure.

Aim of the study

In this study we evaluated the clinical value of preoperative ultrasound scan (USS) testing performed during primary disease staging in patients with early breast cancer qualified to sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB).

Material and methods

The group of breast cancer patients who underwent SLNB from March 2012 to May 2013. As well as the standard procedure of the preoperative diagnostics model, in each patient the USS of axillary lymph nodes was performed additionally. The results were compared with the data from postoperative pathological reports. We attempted to define the factors influencing the possibility of obtaining false positive and false negative USS results.

Results

The analysis comprised 172 patients. In 14.4% of cases with normal USS result the pathological result was different from the expected one (pN1). In 42.3% of patients with suspicious axillary lymph nodes the result of the pathological report was positive. The sensitivity of the USS testing was 89.3%, and the specificity was 34.4%, PPV – 85.6%, NPV – 42.3%.

Conclusions

Ultrasonographic assessment of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients qualified for SLNB is a test with high sensitivity and high predictive value of the positive test result. The possibility of a result contrary to the actual nodal status may result primarily from the technical limitations of USS testing.

Synergy in combining findings from mammography and ultrasonography in detecting malignancy in women with higher density breasts and lesions over 2 cm in Albania

AIM OF THE STUDY

To provide evidence of the synergy of combining findings from mammography (MM) and ultrasonography (US) in detecting malignancy in women with high-density breasts.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 245 women were screened for breast cancer using both mammography and ultrasonography at the American Hospital in Tirana during 2013-2014. The data was used to identify possible benefits in detecting malignancy, by combining the findings of MM and US and confirming them with those of the biopsy. Data on age, breast density, BI-RADS classification, and biopsy confirmations were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

Out of the 245 women, 36 biopsies were taken (17 for women classified BI-RADS 4 and 5; 19 for women with BI-RADS 3 that had grown in size from the previous examination). The accuracy in detecting malignancy for low-density-breast women was 90% for MM, 70% for US, and 90% for combined. For high-density breasts, the accuracy was 65% for MM, 79% for US, and 82% for combined findings. Multivariate analysis indicates that high-density-breast women who have a malignant finding in at least one of the examinations (MM or US) are 24 times more likely (p = 0.039) to have a positive finding in biopsy for malignancy. The odds increased 32 times for lesions over 2 cm (p = 0.056).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results indicate additional benefits of combining findings from MM and US for high-density-breast women. Further study is warranted in a larger population and for different kinds of cancer.