Surveillance Breast MRI and Mammography: Comparison in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer

Surveillance Outcomes by Imaging Methods in the First 5 Years After Breast Cancer Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of imaging methods (mammography alone, ultrasound [US] alone, mammography combined with US, and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]-based examination) for surveillance during the first 5 years after breast cancer surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed the medical records of patients who underwent breast cancer surgery at a single institution between January 2011 and December 2015. Imaging surveillance was performed at 6-month or 1-year intervals during the first 5 years.

RESULTS

A total of 6371 women (median age, 49 years; age range, 20-90 years) underwent 28199 mammograms, 42759 US, and 2619 MRI examinations. Of 172 second breast cancer diagnoses, 19 (11.0%) were interval cancers. Mammography combined with US demonstrated higher cancer detection rate (CDR) compared to mammography alone (odds ratios [OR] = 3.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.52-8.96, P = 0.009) and US alone (OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.71-4.65, P < 0.001), whereas there was no statistical significance when compared with MRI-based examinations (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.49-1.74, P > 0.999). A statistically significant interaction was observed between the mammographic breast density (MBD) and CDR of the imaging methods (P for interaction = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

The CDR of surveillance mammography combined with US was comparable with that of MRI-based examinations in an intensive surveillance setting. Considering the significant interaction between MBD and the CDR, a tailored approach for surveillance based on breast density is warranted.

Enabling AI-Generated Content for Gadolinium-Free Contrast-Enhanced Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging

BACKGROUND

There is increasing interest in utilizing AI-generated content for gadolinium-free contrast-enhanced breast MRI.

PURPOSE

To develop a generative model for gadolinium-free contrast-enhanced breast MRI and evaluate the diagnostic utility of the generated scans.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective.

POPULATION

Two hundred seventy-six women with 304 breast MRI examinations (49 ± 13 years, 243/61 for training/testing).

FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE

ZOOMit diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), T1-weighted volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (T1W VIBE), and axial T2 3D SPACE at 3.0 T.

ASSESSMENT

A generative model was developed to generate contrast-enhanced scans using precontrast T1W VIBE and DWI images. The generated and real images were quantitatively compared using the structural similarity index (SSIM), mean absolute error (MAE), and Dice similarity coefficient. Three radiologists with 8, 5, and 5 years of experience independently rated the image quality and lesion visibility on AI-generated and real images within various subgroups using a five-point scale. Four breast radiologists, with 8, 8, 5, and 5 years of experience, independently and blindly interpreted four reading protocols: unenhanced MRI protocol alone and combined with AI-generated scans, abbreviated MRI protocol, and full-MRI protocol.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Results were assessed using t-tests and McNemar tests. Using pathology diagnosis as reference standard, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each reading protocol. A P value <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

In the test set, the generated images showed similarity to the real images (SSIM: 0.935 ± 0.047 [SD], MAE: 0.015 ± 0.012 [SD], and Dice coefficient: 0.726 ± 0.177 [SD]). No significant difference in lesion visibility was observed between real and AI-generated scans of the mass, non-mass, and benign lesion subgroups. Adding AI-generated scans to the unenhanced MRI protocol slightly improved breast cancer detection (sensitivity: 92.86% vs. 85.71%, NPV: 76.92% vs. 70.00%); achieved non-inferior diagnostic utility compared to the AB-MRI protocol and full-protocol (sensitivity: 92.86%, 95.24%; NPV: 75.00%, 81.82%).

DATA CONCLUSION

AI-generated gadolinium-free contrast-enhanced breast MRI has potential to improve the sensitivity of unenhanced MRI in detecting breast cancer.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.

Surveillance Breast MRI in Women with a History of Breast Cancer: Association with Occurrence of Advanced Second Breast Cancer

Background Studies on the association between surveillance breast MRI in women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) and advanced second breast cancer are lacking. Purpose To investigate the association between postoperative surveillance breast MRI and advanced second breast cancer in women with a PHBC by using propensity score matching (PSM). Materials and Methods Women who underwent breast cancer surgery between January 2009 and December 2014 were retrospectively identified at a single tertiary center. Second breast cancer was defined as ipsilateral or contralateral breast cancer diagnosed at least 1 year after surgery, and advanced second breast cancer was defined as second breast cancer (a) grade T2 or higher or lymph node-positive or (b) T1c triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive. Women who underwent surveillance MRI and those who did not were matched using propensity scores according to 13 clinical-pathologic characteristics. Outcomes were compared using logistic regression analysis. Results Among the 3688 women (mean age, 51.1 years ± 10.5 [SD]), 2130 underwent surveillance MRI (MRI group) and 1558 did not (non-MRI group); 1062 patient pairs were matched. Advanced second breast cancer proportions for non-MRI and MRI groups were 1.7% (27 of 1558 participants) and 0.4% (eight of 2130 participants) before PSM and 1.6% (17 of 1062 participants) and 0.7% (seven of 1062) after PSM. Surveillance MRI was associated with lower odds of advanced second breast cancer before PSM (odds ratio [OR], 0.21 [95% CI: 0.10, 0.47]; P < .001) and after PSM (OR, 0.41 [95% CI: 0.17, 0.99]; P = .048). The proportion of symptomatic second breast cancers was higher in the non-MRI group before PSM (25% [16 of 65 second cancers] vs 6.4% [three of 47]; P = .01) and after PSM (21% [10 of 48] vs 3.2% [one of 31]; P = .003). Conclusion In women with a PHBC, MRI surveillance was associated with lower odds of advanced second breast cancer before and after PSM. © RSNA, 2025 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Factors affecting mammogram breast cancer surveillance effectiveness in the ipsilateral and contralateral breast

AIM

Mammography is the mainstay of imaging surveillance after breast cancer (BC) treatment, but false negatives can occur. The objective of the study was to determine the factors that can predict poorer second breast cancer (SBC) mammogram detection of the ipsilateral and contralateral breast separately.

METHODS

A multicentre retrospective review was performed on female patients with a previous history of treated BC who developed a second breast cancer (SBC) in the ipsilateral (ISBC) or contralateral breast (CSBC) within 10 years from the first BC. SBC cases that occurred between January 2006 and October 2017 were included from the institutional database. The ISBC and CSBC mammogram-occult (MO) rates were correlated with mammographic breast density as well as various clinical, radiological and histological characteristics of the first BC.

RESULTS

274 cases of SBC were evaluated. 39.4 % (108/274) of cases were ISBC and 60.6 % (166/274) were CSBC. 35 (32.4 %) of the ISBCs and 42 (25.3 %) of the CSBCs were MO (p = 0.218). On multivariate analysis, symptomatic first BC (p = 0.041), prevailing dense breast tissue at the time of SBC diagnosis (p = 0.003) and trabecular thickening on surveillance mammograms (p = 0.017) were associated with MO ISBC. MO first BC (p < 0.001) was the only factor found to correlate with MO CSBC.

CONCLUSION

The study found various clinical, radiological and pathological factors associated with mammogram surveillance failure for the ipsilateral and contralateral breast. This information can provide additional guidance in the planning of a personalised surveillance program using adjunct imaging screening.

Contrast-enhanced mammography for surveillance in women with a personal history of breast cancer

PURPOSE

Women with a personal history of breast cancer have an increased risk of subsequent breast malignancy and may benefit from more sensitive surveillance than conventional mammography (MG). We previously reported outcomes for first surveillance episode using contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), demonstrating higher sensitivity and comparable specificity to MG. We now report CEM performance for subsequent surveillance.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 1,190 women in an Australian hospital setting undergoing annual surveillance following initial surveillance CEM between June 2016 and December 2022. Outcome measures were recall rate, cancer detection rate, contribution of contrast to recalls, false positive rate, interval cancer rate and characteristics of surveillance detected and interval cancers.

RESULTS

2,592 incident surveillance episodes were analysed, of which 93% involved contrast-based imaging. Of 116 (4.5%) recall episodes, 40/116 (34%) recalls were malignant (27 invasive; 13 ductal carcinoma in situ), totalling 15.4 cancers per 1000 surveillance episodes. 55/116 (47%) recalls were contrast-directed including 17/40 (43%) true positive recalls. Tumour features were similar for contrast-directed recalls and other diagnoses. 8/9 (89%) of contrast-directed invasive recalls were Grade 2-3, and 5/9 (56%) were triple negative breast cancers. There were two symptomatic interval cancers (0.8 per 1000 surveillance episodes, program sensitivity 96%).

CONCLUSION

Routine use of CEM in surveillance of women with PHBC led to an increase in the detection of clinically significant malignant lesions, with a low interval cancer rate compared to previous published series. Compared to mammographic surveillance, contrast-enhanced mammography increases the sensitivity of surveillance programs for women with PHBC.

Breast Cancer Screening Using Mammography, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging by Breast Density

Importance

Information on long-term benefits and harms of screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with or without supplemental breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is needed for clinical and policy discussions, particularly for patients with dense breasts.

Objective

To project long-term population-based outcomes for breast cancer mammography screening strategies (DBT or digital mammography) with or without supplemental MRI by breast density.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Collaborative modeling using 3 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) breast cancer simulation models informed by US Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data. Simulated women born in 1980 with average breast cancer risk were included. Modeling analyses were conducted from January 2020 to December 2023.

Intervention

Annual or biennial mammography screening with or without supplemental MRI by breast density starting at ages 40, 45, or 50 years through age 74 years.

Main outcomes and Measures

Lifetime breast cancer deaths averted, false-positive recall and false-positive biopsy recommendations per 1000 simulated women followed-up from age 40 years to death summarized as means and ranges across models.

Results

Biennial DBT screening for all simulated women started at age 50 vs 40 years averted 7.4 vs 8.5 breast cancer deaths, respectively, and led to 884 vs 1392 false-positive recalls and 151 vs 221 false-positive biopsy recommendations, respectively. Biennial digital mammography had similar deaths averted and slightly more false-positive test results than DBT screening. Adding MRI for women with extremely dense breasts to biennial DBT screening for women aged 50 to 74 years increased deaths averted (7.6 vs 7.4), false-positive recalls (919 vs 884), and false-positive biopsy recommendations (180 vs 151). Extending supplemental MRI to women with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts further increased deaths averted (8.0 vs 7.4), false-positive recalls (1088 vs 884), and false-positive biopsy recommendations (343 vs 151). The same strategy for women aged 40 to 74 years averted 9.5 deaths but led to 1850 false-positive recalls and 628 false-positive biopsy recommendations. Annual screening modestly increased estimated deaths averted but markedly increased estimated false-positive results.

Conclusions and relevance

In this model-based comparative effectiveness analysis, supplemental MRI for women with dense breasts added to DBT screening led to greater benefits and increased harms. The balance of this trade-off for supplemental MRI use was more favorable when MRI was targeted to women with extremely dense breasts who comprise approximately 10% of the population.

MR-contrast enhanced mammography (CEM) for follow-up of breast cancer patients: a "pros and cons" debate

Women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) are at an increased risk of either a local recurrence or a new primary breast cancer. Thus, surveillance is essential for the detection of recurrent disease at the earliest possible stage, allowing for prompt treatment, and potentially improving overall survival. Nowadays, mammography follow-up is the only surveillance imaging technique recommended by international guidelines. Nevertheless, sensitivity of mammography is lower after breast cancer treatment, particularly during the first 5 years, due to increased density or post-treatment changes. Contrast-enhanced breast imaging techniques, such as MRI or contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), are very sensitive to detect malignant enhancement, especially in dense breasts. This Special Report will provide arguments in favor of and against breast cancer follow-up with MRI or CEM, in a debate style between experts in Breast Imaging. Finally, the scientific points of pros and cons arguments will be summarized to help objectively decide the best follow-up strategy for women with a personal history of breast cancer. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: A personalized approach to follow-up imaging after conservative breast cancer treatment could optimize patient outcomes, using mammography as a baseline for most patients, and MRI or CEM selectively in patients with higher risks for a recurrence. KEY POINTS: • Women with a personal history of breast cancer are at an increased risk of either a local recurrence or a new primary breast cancer. • Breast cancer survivors may benefit from additional imaging with MRI/CEM, in case of increased risk of a second breast cancer, with dense breasts or a cancer diagnosis before age 50 years. • As survival after local recurrence seems to depend on the initial stage at diagnosis, imaging should be more focused on detecting tumors in the earliest stages.

Surveillance Strategies After Primary Treatment for Patients with Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast: Method of Local Recurrence Detection After Breast-Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND

Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the second most common subtype of breast cancer. Although mammography is known to have low sensitivity for ILC, there are no data to guide the optimal surveillance after treatment. We explored surveillance strategies after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ILC and determined the proportion of imaging-detected recurrences versus interval cancers.

METHODS

From an institutional database of 813 women, we retrospectively identified patients who underwent BCS for stage I-III ILC and subsequently had a recurrence. We categorized patients by surveillance strategy and determined the modality of recurrence detection. Interval cancer rates for local recurrences were compared across surveillance strategies using the Chi-square test. We evaluated overall survival with the log-rank test and a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

We included 58 patients with ILC who had a recurrence after BCS. Of these, 22 (37.9%) had local recurrence, 27 (46.6%) had distant recurrence, and 9 (15.5%) had both local and distant recurrence. Most patients underwent routine mammographic surveillance (65.2%), with 19.6% having supplemental breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 15.2% having no surveillance. The interval cancer rate was significantly higher in the mammographic surveillance group compared with the MRI surveillance group (61.9% vs. 16.7%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this study of patients with recurrence after BCS for primary treatment of stage I-III ILC, we found that most local recurrences were not detected by surveillance mammography. These data support further investigation of supplemental imaging beyond mammography specifically for patients with ILC who undergo BCS.

Enhancing Early-Stage Breast Cancer Survivorship: Evidence-Based Strategies, Surveillance Testing, and Imaging Guidelines

Addressing the challenges of survivorship necessitates a comprehensive, patient-centered approach, focusing on mitigating risk through lifestyle modification, identifying distant recurrence, and optimization of breast imaging. This article will discuss the current and emerging clinical strategies for the survivorship period, advocating a multidisciplinary and comprehensive approach. In this manner, early-stage breast cancer survivors are empowered to navigate their journey with enhanced knowledge, facilitating a transition to life beyond cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Imaging of Invasive Breast Cancer

As the proportion of women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer increases, the role of imaging for staging and surveillance purposes should be determined based on evidence-based guidelines. It is important to understand the indications for extent of disease evaluation and staging, as unnecessary imaging can delay care and even result in adverse outcomes. In asymptomatic patients that received treatment for curative intent, there is no role for imaging to screen for distant recurrence. Routine surveillance with an annual 2-D mammogram and/or tomosynthesis is recommended to detect an in-breast recurrence or a new primary breast cancer in women with a history of breast cancer, and MRI is increasingly used as an additional screening tool in this population, especially in women with dense breasts. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Imaging Preferences in Women With a History of Breast Cancer Receiving Contrast-Enhanced Mammography

OBJECTIVE

There is interest in contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) to screen breast cancer survivors, yet it is unclear whether they would accept CEM as their annual exam. The purpose of this study was to understand patient preferences to guide CEM implementation for screening.

METHODS

Consecutive women with breast cancer history who had CEM as their annual mammogram from July 2020 to August 2021 at a single academic institution completed an 18-question survey regarding prior contrast imaging, CEM experience, and comparison to other breast imaging exams. Response proportions were calculated, and chi-square or Fisher's exact test were used to evaluate associations of demographics with responses.

RESULTS

A total of 78% (104/133) of women undergoing CEM provided results. Most were satisfied with CEM (99%, 103/104), had nothing to complain about (87%, 90/104), did not find CEM anxiety provoking (69%, 72/104), felt comfortable having contrast for annual imaging (94%, 98/104), were willing to accept the small risk of a contrast reaction if CEM would find their cancer (93%, 97/104), and would like to have CEM for their exam next year (95%, 99/104). Compared with mammography, 23% (24/104) reported CEM was a better experience, and 63% (66/104) reported CEM was about the same. Of those who had prior MRI, the majority reported CEM was better (53%, 29/55) and would prefer CEM if both MRI and CEM had an equal chance of detecting cancer (73%, 41/56). Most preferences did not differ significantly according to demographics.

CONCLUSION

Most women surveyed considered CEM to be satisfactory and preferred compared to other breast screening modalities.

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.

Recommendations for the Screening of Breast Cancer of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Brazilian Society of Mastology and Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Association

OBJECTIVE

 To present the update of the recommendations of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, the Brazilian Society of Mastology and the Brazilian Federation of Associations of Gynecology and Obstetrics for breast cancer screening in Brazil.

METHODS

 Scientific evidence published in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, CINAHL and Lilacs databases between January 2012 and July 2022 was searched. Recommendations were based on this evidence by consensus of the expert committee of the three entities.

RECOMMENDATIONS

 Annual mammography screening is recommended for women at usual risk aged 40-74 years. Above 75 years, it should be reserved for those with a life expectancy greater than seven years. Women at higher than usual risk, including those with dense breasts, with a personal history of atypical lobular hyperplasia, classic lobular carcinoma in situ, atypical ductal hyperplasia, treatment for breast cancer or chest irradiation before age 30, or even, carriers of a genetic mutation or with a strong family history, benefit from complementary screening, and should be considered individually. Tomosynthesis is a form of mammography and should be considered in screening whenever accessible and available.

Recommendations for breast cancer screening in Brazil, from the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, the Brazilian Society of Mastology, and the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations

Objective

To present an update of the recommendations of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, the Brazilian Society of Mastology, and the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations for breast cancer screening in Brazil.

Materials and Methods

Scientific evidence published between January 2012 and July 2022 was gathered from the following databases: Medline (PubMed); Excerpta Medica (Embase); Cochrane Library; Ebsco; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (Cinahl); and Latin-American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (Lilacs). Recommendations were based on that evidence and were arrived at by consensus of a joint committee of experts from the three entities.Recommendations: Annual mammographic screening is recommended for women between 40 and 74 years of age. For women at or above the age of 75, screening should be reserved for those with a life expectancy greater than seven years. Women at higher than average risk are considered by category: those with dense breasts; those with a personal history of atypical lobular hyperplasia, classical lobular carcinoma in situ, or atypical ductal hyperplasia; those previously treated for breast cancer; those having undergone thoracic radiotherapy before age 30; and those with a relevant genetic mutation or a strong family history. The benefits of complementary screening are also addressed according to the subcategories above. The use of tomosynthesis, which is an evolved form of mammography, should be considered in screening, whenever accessible and available.

Semiannual Breast US or MRI Screening in Patients with a Personal History of Breast Cancer

Background The wide variability of screening imaging use in patients with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) warrants investigation of its comparative clinical effectiveness. While more intensive screening with US or MRI at an interval of less than 1 year could increase early-stage breast cancer detection, its benefit has not been established. Purpose To investigate the outcomes of semiannual multimodality screening in patients with PHBC. Materials and Methods An academic medical center database was retrospectively searched for patients diagnosed with breast cancer between January 2015 and June 2018 who had undergone annual mammography with either semiannual incidence US or MRI screening from July 2019 to December 2019 and three subsequent semiannual screenings over a 2-year period. The primary outcome was second breast cancers diagnosed during follow-up. Examination-level cancer detection and interval cancer rates were calculated. Screening performances were compared with χ2 or Fisher exact tests or a logistic model with generalized estimating equations. Results Our final cohort included 2758 asymptomatic women (median age, 53 years; range, 20-84 years). Among 5615 US and 1807 MRI examinations, 18 breast cancers were detected after negative findings on a prior semiannual incidence US screening examination; 44% (eight of 18) were stage 0 (three detected with MRI; five, with US), and 39% (seven of 18) were stage I (three detected with MRI; four, with US). MRI had a cancer detection rate up to 17.1 per 1000 examinations (eight of 467; 95% CI: 8.7, 33.4), and the overall cancer detection rates of US and MRI were 1.8 (10 of 5615; 95% CI: 1.0, 3.3) and 4.4 (eight of 1807; 95% CI: 2.2, 8.8) per 1000 examinations, respectively (P = .11). Conclusion Supplemental semiannual US or MRI screening depicted second breast cancers after negative findings at prior semiannual incidence US examination in patients with PHBC. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Berg in this issue.

Imaging Recommendations for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Hereditary Malignancies

Hereditary cancer syndromes, characterized by genetically distinct neoplasms developing in specific organs in more than one family members, predispose an individual to early onset of distinct site-specific tumors. Early age of onset, multiorgan involvement, multiple and bilateral tumors, advanced disease at presentation, and aggressive tumor histology are few characteristic features of hereditary cancer syndromes. A multidisciplinary approach to hereditary cancers has led to a paradigm shift in the field of preventive oncology and precision medicine. Imaging plays a pivotal role in the screening, testing, and follow-up of individuals and their first- and second-degree relatives with hereditary cancers. In fact, a radiologist is often the first to apprise the clinician about the possibility of an underlying hereditary cancer syndrome based on pathognomonic imaging findings. This article focuses on the imaging spectrum of few common hereditary cancer syndromes with specific mention of the imaging features of associated common and uncommon tumors in each syndrome. The screening and surveillance recommendations for each condition with specific management approaches, in contrast to sporadic cases, have also been described.

Mammographic calcifications undergoing percutaneous biopsy: outcome in women with and without a personal history of breast cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the positive predictive values (PPVs) of BI-RADS categories used to assess pure mammographic calcifications in women with and without a previous history of breast cancer (PHBC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, all consecutive pure mammographic calcifications (n = 320) undergoing a stereotactic biopsy between 2016 and 2018 were identified. Mammograms were evaluated in consensus by two radiologists according to BI-RADS and blinded to patient history and pathology results. Final pathologic results were used as the standard of reference. PPV of BI-RADS categories were compared between the two groups. Data were evaluated using standard statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests and Chi-square tests.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-eight patients (274 lesions, median age 54 years, inter-quartile range, 50-65 years) with a PHBC (n = 46) and without a PHBC (n = 222) were included. Overall PPVs were the following: BI-RADS 2, 0% (0 of 56); BI-RADS 3, 9.1% (1 of 11); BI-RADS 4a, 16.2% (6 of 37); BI-RADS 4b, 37.5% (48 of 128); BI-RADS 4c, 47.3% (18 of 38) and BI-RADS 5, 100% (4 of 4). The PPV of BI-RADS categories was similar in patients with and without a PHBC (P = .715). Calcifications were more often malignant in patients with a PHBC older than 10 years (47.3%, 9 of 19) compared to 1-2 years (25%, 1 of 4), 2-5 years (20%, 2 of 10) and 5-10 years (0%, of 13) from the first breast cancer (P = .005).

CONCLUSION

PPV of mammographic calcifications is similar in women with or without PHBC when BI-RADS classification is strictly applied. A higher risk of malignancy was observed in patients with a PHBC longer than 10 years.

Dedicated breast computed-tomography in women with a personal history of breast cancer: A proof-of-concept study

PURPOSE

To compare the subjective image quality assessment using B-CT and digital mammography in women with personal history of breast cancer (PHBC).

METHOD

In this retrospective study 32 patients with PHBC were included. Each patient had undergone a B-CT examination and a previous mammogram in a time interval of less than 18 months between the two examinations. Two radiologists evaluated the two examinations independently with regard to the presence of lesions, BI-RADS classification, level of confidence for the overall exam interpretation, scar evaluation and image quality including image degradation due to clip artifacts. Level of confidence and image quality were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. A p-value of less than 0.01 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven operated and 27 non-operated breasts were included. Confidence for the overall interpretation with B-CT was equal or superior to mammography in 63 cases (98.4 %) for reader 1 and in 58 cases (90.6 %) for reader 2 (p <.001). Confidence for scar evaluation with B-CT was equal or superior to mammography in all cases for reader 1 and in 34 cases (91.9 %) for readers 2 (p <.001). One case with local recurrence in B-CT was identified by both readers and no false positive findings were reported. A moderate to high image degradation due to beam-hardening artifacts has been reported by both readers in 29.4 % of cases due to surgical clips in the B-CT volume.

CONCLUSIONS

B-CT in patients with PHBC provides high quality images that can be evaluated with confidence equal or superior to mammography.

Imaging Surveillance Options for Individuals With a Personal History of Breast Cancer: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Annual surveillance mammography is recommended for breast cancer survivors on the basis of observational studies and meta-analyses showing reduced breast cancer mortality and improved quality of life. However, breast cancer survivors are at higher risk of subsequent breast cancer and have a fourfold increased risk of interval breast cancers compared with individuals without a personal history of breast cancer. Supplemental surveillance modalities offer increased cancer detection compared with mammography alone, but utilization is variable, and benefits must be balanced with possible harms of false-positive findings. In this review, we describe the current state of mammographic surveillance, summarize evidence for supplemental surveillance in breast cancer survivors, and explore a risk-based approach to selecting surveillance imaging strategies. Further research identifying predictors associated with increased risk of interval second breast cancers and development of validated risk prediction tools may help physicians and patients weigh the benefits and harms of surveillance breast imaging and decide on a personalized approach to surveillance for improved breast cancer outcomes.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Imaging After Breast Surgery

Given that 20% to 40% of women who have percutaneous breast biopsy subsequently undergo breast surgery, knowledge of imaging women with a history of benign (including high-risk) disease or breast cancer is important. For women who had surgery for nonmalignant pathology, the surveillance recommendations are determined by their overall risk. Higher-than-average risk women with a history of benign surgery may require screening mammography starting at an earlier age before 40 and may benefit from screening MRI. For women with breast cancer who have undergone initial excision and have positive margins, imaging with diagnostic mammography or MRI can sometimes guide additional surgical planning. Women who have completed breast conservation therapy for cancer should get annual mammography and may benefit from the addition of MRI or ultrasound to their surveillance regimen. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Comparison of diagnostic values of two magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocols for diagnosis of breast lesions

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has a pivotal role in diagnosing breast lesions. Here we aimed to compare the diagnostic values of Abbreviated and Full Breast MRI for breast lesions.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study performed in 2017-2021 on 80 women with breast lesions. Using the available MRI analysis software, the necessary sequences for the Abbreviated MRI were extracted from standard breast MRI protocol. First, a Full Breast MRI was examined by a radiologist giving Breast imaging-reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Then, from this Full Breast MRI, the necessary sequences for Abbreviated Breast MRI were prepared. The second expert radiologist read them in this field and BIRADS was reported. The data relating to each patient were recorded in the patient-specific profile and then the pathology results were followed for each patient.

RESULTS

Modified breast MRI had 84% sensitivity and 58.18% specificity, while full Breast MRI had 100% sensitivity and 38.18% specificity. Comparing the results of pathology (benign or malignant) for breast tumors and BIRADS reported by modified breast MRI indicated that these results were similar in 53 cases (66.3%) and different in 27 patients (33.8%). On the other hand, similar assessments for Full Breast MRI and pathology reports showed that the results were the same in 46 patients (57.5%) and different in 34 patients (42.5%).

CONCLUSION

Abbreviated breast MRI has lower sensitivity and higher specificity than full breast MRI.

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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Imaging of the Axilla

This publication reviews the current evidence supporting the imaging approach of the axilla in various scenarios with broad differential diagnosis ranging from inflammatory to malignant etiologies. Controversies on the management of axillary adenopathy results in disagreement on the appropriate axillary imaging tests. Ultrasound is often the appropriate initial imaging test in several clinical scenarios. Clinical information (such as age, physical examinations, risk factors) and concurrent complete breast evaluation with mammogram, tomosynthesis, or MRI impact the type of initial imaging test for the axilla. Several impactful clinical trials demonstrated that selected patient's population can received sentinel lymph node biopsy instead of axillary lymph node dissection with similar overall survival, and axillary lymph node dissection is a safe alternative as the nodal staging procedure for clinically node negative patients or even for some node positive patients with limited nodal tumor burden. This approach is not universally accepted, which adversely affect the type of imaging tests considered appropriate for axilla. This document is focused on the initial imaging of the axilla in various scenarios, with the understanding that concurrent or subsequent additional tests may also be performed for the breast. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

High Uniformity and Enhancement Au@AgNS 3D Substrates for the Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

Breast cancer appears to be one of the leading causes of cancer-related morbidity and mortality for women worldwide. The accurate and rapid diagnosis of breast cancer is hence critical for the treatment and prognosis of patients. With the vibrational fingerprint information and high detection sensitivity, surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) has been extensively applied in biomedicine. Here, an optimized bimetallic nanosphere (Au@Ag NS) 3D substrate was fabricated for the aim of the diagnosis of breast cancer based on the SERS analysis of the extracellular metabolites. The unique stacking mode of 3D Au@Ag NSs provided multiple plasmonic hot spots according to the theoretical calculations of the electromagnetic field distribution. The low relative standard deviation (RSD = 2.7%) and high enhancement factor (EF = 1.42 × 10⁵) proved the uniformity and high sensitivity. More importantly, the normal breast cells and breast cancer cells could be readily distinguished from the corresponding SERS spectra based on the extracellular metabolites. Furthermore, the clear clusters of SERS spectra from MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 extracellular metabolites in the orthogonal partial least-squares discriminant analysis plot indicate the distinct metabolic fingerprint between breast cancer cells, which imply their potential clinical application in the diagnosis of breast cancer.

Screening MRI in Women at Intermediate Breast Cancer Risk: An Update of the Recent Literature

Guidelines issued by the American Cancer Society (ACS) in 2007 recommend neither for nor against screening MRI in women at intermediate breast cancer risk (15%-20%), including those with dense breast tissue, a history of lobular neoplasia or atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), or a prior breast cancer, because of scarce supporting evidence about the utility of MRI in these specific patient populations. However, since the issuance of the ACS guidelines in 2007, multiple investigations have found that women at intermediate risk may be suitable candidates for screening MRI, given the high detection rates of early-stage cancers and acceptable false-positive rates. For women with dense breast tissue, the Dense Tissue and Early Breast Neoplasm Screening trial reported that the incremental cancer detection rate (CDR) by MRI exceeded 16 cancers per 1000 examinations but decreased in the second round of screening; this decrease in CDR, however, occurred alongside a marked decrease in the false-positive rate. For women with lobular neoplasia or ADH, single-institution retrospective analyses have shown CDRs mostly ranging from 11 to 16 cancers per 1000 MRI examinations, with women with lobular carcinoma in situ benefitting more than women with atypical lobular hyperplasia or ADH. For patients with a prior breast cancer, the cancer yield by MRI varies widely but mostly ranges from 8 to 20 cancers per 1000 examinations, with certain subpopulations more likely to benefit, such as those with dense breasts. This article reviews and summarizes more recent studies on MRI screening of intermediate-risk women.

Digital Mammography and Breast Tomosynthesis Performance in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer, 2007-2016

Background Since 2007, digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) replaced screen-film mammography. Whether these technologic advances have improved diagnostic performance has, to the knowledge of the authors, not yet been established. Purpose To evaluate the performance and outcomes of surveillance mammography (digital mammography and DBT) performed from 2007 to 2016 in women with a personal history of breast cancer and compare with data from 1996 to 2007 and the performance of digital mammography screening benchmarks. Materials and Methods In this observational cohort study, five Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries provided prospectively collected mammography data linked with tumor registry and pathologic outcomes. This study identified asymptomatic women with American Joint Committee on Cancer anatomic stages 0-III primary breast cancer who underwent surveillance mammography from 2007 to 2016. The primary outcome was a second breast cancer diagnosis within 1 year of mammography. Performance measures included the recall rate, cancer detection rate, interval cancer rate, positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation, sensitivity, and specificity. Results Among 32 331 women who underwent 117 971 surveillance mammographic examinations (112 269 digital mammographic examinations and 5702 DBT examinations), the mean age at initial diagnosis was 59 years ± 12 (standard deviation). Of 1418 second breast cancers diagnosed, 998 were surveillance-detected cancers and 420 were interval cancers. The recall rate was 8.8% (10 365 of 117 971; 95% CI: 8.6%, 9.0%), the cancer detection rate was 8.5 per 1000 examinations (998 of 117 971; 95% CI: 8.0, 9.0), the interval cancer rate was 3.6 per 1000 examinations (420 of 117 971; 95% CI: 3.2, 3.9), the positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation was 31.0% (998 of 3220; 95% CI: 29.4%, 32.7%), the sensitivity was 70.4% (998 of 1418; 95% CI: 67.9%, 72.7%), and the specificity was 98.1% (114 331 of 116 553; 95% CI: 98.0%, 98.2%). Compared with previously published studies, interval cancer rate was comparable with rates from 1996 to 2007 in women with a personal history of breast cancer and was higher than the published digital mammography screening benchmarks. Conclusion In transitioning from screen-film to digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis, surveillance mammography performance demonstrated minimal improvement over time and remained inferior to the performance of screening mammography benchmarks. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Moy and Gao in this issue.

Mini review: The FDA-approved prescription drugs that target the MAPK signaling pathway in women with breast cancer

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer and the prevalent type of malignancy among women. Multiple risk factors, including genetic changes, biological age, dense breast tissue, and obesity are associated with BC. The mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) signaling pathway has a pivotal role in regulating biological functions such as cell proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis, and survival. It has become evident that the MAPK pathway is associated with tumorigenesis and may promote breast cancer development. The MAPK/RAS/RAF cascade is closely associated with breast cancer. RAS signaling can enhance BC cell growth and progression. B-Raf is an important kinase and a potent RAF isoform involved in breast tumor initiation and differentiation. Depending on the reasons for cancer, there are different strategies for treatment of women with BC. Till now, several FDA-approved treatments have been investigated that inhibit the MAPK pathway and reduce metastatic progression in breast cancer. The most common breast cancer drugs that regulate or inhibit the MAPK pathway may include Farnesyltransferase inhibitors (FTIs), Sorafenib, Vemurafenib, PLX8394, Dabrafenib, Ulixertinib, Simvastatin, Alisertib, and Teriflunomide. In this review, we will discuss the roles of the MAPK/RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway in BC and summarize the FDA-approved prescription drugs that target the MAPK signaling pathway in women with BC.

Interval Cancers after Negative Supplemental Screening Breast MRI Results in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer

Background There are few interval cancer studies of incident screening MRI for women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC). Purpose To evaluate the performance measures of screening breast MRI in women with a PHBC across multiple rounds and to identify subgroups who might be more at risk for interval cancer. Materials and Methods Between January 2008 and March 2019, consecutive screening breast MRI studies for women who had undergone breast-conserving surgery because of breast cancer were retrospectively identified. Inclusion criteria were negative or benign findings at mammography with US, availability of at least 1 year of follow-up data, and examinations having been performed within 12 months after the initial cancer surgery. Performance measures were calculated for each round. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with the risk of interval cancer. Results Among the 6603 MRI examinations for 2809 women (median age, 47 years; interquartile range, 42-53 years), the cancer detection rate was 8.3 per 1000 screening examinations (55 of 6603 examinations) and the interval cancer rate was 1.5 per 1000 screening examinations (10 of 6603 examinations). The sensitivity and specificity were 85% (55 of 65 examinations; 95% CI: 76, 93) and 88.3% (5775 of 6538 examinations; 95% CI: 87.6, 89.1), respectively. At multivariable analysis, interval cancers were associated with a first-degree family history of breast cancer (odds ratio [OR], 5.4; 95% CI: 1.3, 22.5; P = .02), estrogen receptor- and progesterone receptor-negative primary cancers (OR, 3.6; 95% CI: 1.1, 12.2; P = .04), and moderate or marked background parenchymal enhancement (OR, 10.8; 95% CI: 3.3, 35.7; P < .001). Conclusion Performance of screening breast MRI in women with a personal history of breast cancer was sustained across multiple rounds, and a first-degree family history of breast cancer, estrogen receptor- and progesterone receptor-negative primary cancers, and moderate or marked background parenchymal enhancement at MRI were independently associated with the risk of developing interval cancers. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Slanetz in this issue.

Breast Cancer Screening with Abbreviated Breast MRI: 3-year Outcome Analysis

Background Data are limited regarding the performance of abbreviated screening breast MRI during consecutive years and the characteristics of breast cancers missed and detected with it. Purpose To assess the longitudinal diagnostic performance of abbreviated screening MRI and to determine whether the screening outcomes of abbreviated MRI differed between yearly time periods for 3 consecutive years. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 1975 consecutive women who underwent abbreviated screening MRI between September 2015 and August 2018. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories 3-5 defined positive results, and BI-RADS categories 1-2 defined negative results. Cancer detection rate (CDR), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), and interval cancer rate were assessed annually. Yearly performance measures were compared with the Fisher exact test by using the permutation method. Clinical-pathologic and imaging characteristics of the missed and detected cancers were compared by using the Fisher exact test and the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results A total of 1975 women (median age, 49 years; interquartile range, 44-56 years) underwent 3037 abbreviated MRI examinations over 3 years. CDR (year 1 to year 3, 6.9-10.7 per 1000 examinations), positive predictive value for recall (9.7% [six of 62] to 15.6% [12 of 77]), positive predictive value for biopsy (31.6% [six of 19] to 63.2% [12 of 19]), sensitivity (75.0% [six of eight] to 80.0% [12 of 15]), and specificity (93.5% [807 of 863] to 94.1% [1041 of 1106]) were highest in year 3, and AIR (7.1% [62 of 871] to 6.9% [77 of 1121]) was lowest in year 3. However, all outcome measures did not differ statistically between years 1, 2, and 3 (all P > .05). The interval cancer rate was 0.66 per 1000 examinations (two of 3037). Thirty-eight breast cancers were identified in 36 women; 29 were detected with abbreviated MRI, but nine were missed. Of these, seven were detected with other imaging modalities after negative results at the last screening MRI examination, and two were interval cancers. All missed cancers were node-negative early-stage invasive cancers and were smaller (median size, 0.8 cm vs 1.2 cm; P = .01) than detected cancers. Conclusion Screening outcome measures of abbreviated MRI were sustained without significant differences between 3 consecutive years. All cancers missed at abbreviated MRI were node-negative invasive cancers and tended to be smaller than detected cancers. © RSNA, 2021 See also the editorial by Lee in this issue. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Screening of Breast Cancer

Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging is the most sensitive modality for breast cancer detection but is currently limited to screening women at high risk due to limited specificity and test accessibility. However, specificity of MR imaging improves with successive rounds of screening, and abbreviated approaches have the potential to increase access and decrease cost. There is growing evidence to support supplemental MR imaging in moderate-risk women, and current guidelines continue to evolve. Functional imaging has the potential to maximize survival benefit of screening. Leveraging MR imaging as a possible primary screening tool is therefore also being investigated in average-risk women.

Imaging Surveillance of Breast Cancer Survivors with Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

Background Among breast cancer survivors, detecting a breast cancer when it is asymptomatic (rather than symptomatic) improves survival; thus, imaging surveillance in these patients is warranted. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is used for screening, but data on DBT for surveillance in this high-risk population are limited. Purpose To determine whether DBT leads to improved screening performance metrics when compared with two-dimensional digital mammography among breast cancer survivors. Materials and Methods In this study, screening mammograms obtained in breast cancer survivors before and after DBT implementation were retrospectively reviewed (March 2008-February 2011 for the digital mammography group; January 2013-December 2017 for the DBT group). Mammograms were interpreted by breast imaging radiologists with the assistance of computer-aided detection. Performance metrics and tumor characteristics between the groups were compared using multivariable logistic regression models. Results The digital mammography and DBT groups were composed of 9019 and 22 887 mammographic examinations, respectively, in 8170 women (mean age, 62 years ± 12 [standard deviation]). In the DBT group, the abnormal interpretation rate was lower (5.8% [1331 of 22 887 examinations] vs 6.2% [563 of 9019 examinations]; odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% CI: 0.71, 0.91; P = .001) and specificity was higher (95.0% [21 502 of 22 644 examinations] vs 94.7% [8424 of 8891 examinations]; OR, 1.23; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.41; P = .003) than in the digital mammography group. The cancer detection rates did not differ (8.3 per 1000 examinations with DBT vs 10.6 with digital mammography; OR, 0.76; 95% CI: 0.57, 1.02; P = .07). The proportions of screening-detected invasive cancers, versus in situ cancers, were similar (74% [140 of 189 cancers] in the DBT group vs 72% [69 of 96 cancers] in the digital mammography group; P = .69). Of 86 interval cancers, 58% (50 of 86 cancers) manifested with symptoms, and 33% (28 of 86 cancers) were detected at screening MRI. Conclusion Among breast cancer survivors, screening with digital breast tomosynthesis led to fewer false-positive results and higher specificity but did not affect cancer detection. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Hooley and Butler in this issue.

Supplemental Screening for Patients at Intermediate and High Risk for Breast Cancer

The sensitivity of mammography is more limited in patients with dense breasts and some patients at higher risk for breast cancer. Patients with intermediate or high risk for breast cancer may begin screening earlier and benefit from supplemental screening techniques beyond standard 2-dimensional mammography. A patient's individual risk factors for developing breast cancer, their breast density, and the evidence supporting specific modalities for a given clinical scenario help to determine the need for supplemental screening and the modality chosen. Additional factors include the availability of supplemental screening techniques at an individual institution, cost, insurance coverage, and state-specific breast density legislation.

Routine use of both mammography and MRI surveillance in patients with previous 'mammogram occult' breast cancer: experience from a tertiary centre

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the role of combined MRI and mammogram follow-up in patients with previous 'mammographically occult' breast cancer.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2016, examinations of all patients undergoing routine surveillance following previous 'mammogram occult' breast cancer were evaluated. Patients had both MRI and mammograms on the same day with an interval of 12-18 months between consecutive pairs. Total number of recalls on both imaging modalities and the outcome of those recalls was recorded. There were six median examinations per patient.

RESULTS

There were a total of 325 examinations of 54 patients. There were 96 mammograms/MRI pairs and 87 lone MRI and 46 lone mammograms. There were a total of 26 recalls in 21 patients. MRI had specificity (95% CI) of 89.99 (85.67 to 93.11) compared to mammograms 96.27 (92.53 to 98.25). The diagnostic OR with 95% CI was 19.40 (3.70 to 101.57) vs 6.72 (1.43 to 31.58) of mammograms and MRI, respectively. Three of seven cancers presented symptomatically.

CONCLUSIONS

MRI surveillance leads to higher recalls and false positives compared to mammograms in this specific subgroup of high-risk patients. Large proportion of cancers presented symptomatically, stressing the importance of remaining vigilant of breast symptoms despite imaging surveillance.

Abbreviated Protocol Breast MRI

OBJECTIVE. Patients with dense breast tissue are seeking supplemental screening because of the limited sensitivity of mammography. Abbreviated protocol (AP) breast MRI is attractive because it offers a higher cancer detection rate, shorter scan time, and lower cost than full MRI. This article explores the issues of balancing the benefits of AP MRI with safety concerns about gadolinium-based contrast agents, lack of standardization of protocols and field strengths, potential decrease in performance metrics, and potential for overdiagnosis. CONCLUSION. Important questions need to be addressed before AP MRI can be used routinely for breast cancer screening. Evidence is lacking from well-designed prospective trials that can confirm the accuracy and efficacy of AP MRI are comparable with those of other breast imaging modalities. Determining which patients benefit most from AP MRI will help shape future screening guidelines.

The utility of magnetic resonance imaging in early-stage breast cancer survivors-An institutional experience and literature review

The role of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the screening of breast cancer survivors with remaining breast tissue is not well studied. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of screening breast MRI in a cohort of breast cancer survivors. A population of patients with history of stage I-IIIa breast cancer and ≥1 MRI a year or later from diagnosis between 2006-2008 were identified using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network data base from two large Boston-area cancer centers. Patient and disease characteristics were obtained from the data base, and medical records were reviewed to identify the index MRI (first eligible), indications, and two-year outcomes. Overall, 647 patients had breast MRI scans during the study period including 342 eligible patients whose index MRIs were done for breast screening purposes. 47/342 (13.7%) were abnormal, and 3.8% (13/342) underwent biopsy, resulting in the detection of 3 cases of locoregional recurrence or new primary breast cancer (0.9%, 95% CI = 0.2%-2.5%). Of 295 patients with a normal index screening MRI, 12 had a breast cancer recurrence diagnosed within 2 years (4.1% 95%CI = 2.1%-7.0%), and 5 of these recurrences were limited to MRI-screened breast tissue. No statistically significant difference in the rate of 2-year locoregional or distant recurrence was observed between patients with an abnormal screening MRI and those with a normal scan. Adjunct single breast MRI surveillance in a general population of breast cancer survivors one year after diagnosis detected few recurrences, and its effect on short-term outcomes was unclear.

Facility Variability in Examination Indication Among Women With Prior Breast Cancer: Implications and the Need for Standardization

OBJECTIVE

We sought to identify and characterize examinations in women with a personal history of breast cancer likely performed for asymptomatic surveillance.

METHODS

We included surveillance mammograms (1997-2017) in asymptomatic women with a personal history of breast cancer diagnosed at age ≥18 years (1996-2016) from 103 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium facilities. We examined facility-level variability in examination indication. We modeled the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) at the examination level of a (1) nonscreening indication and (2) surveillance interval ≤9 months using Poisson regression with fixed effects for facility, stage, diagnosis age, surgery, examination year, and time since diagnosis.

RESULTS

Among 244,855 surveillance mammograms, 69.5% were coded with a screening indication, 12.7% short-interval follow-up, and 15.3% as evaluation of a breast problem. Within a facility, the proportion of examinations with a screening indication ranged from 6% to 100% (median 86%, interquartile range 79%-92%). Facilities varied the most for examinations in the first 5 years after diagnosis, with 39.4% of surveillance mammograms having a nonscreening indication. Within a facility, breast conserving surgery compared with mastectomy (RR = 1.64; 95% CI = 1.60-1.68) and less time since diagnosis (1 year versus 5 years; RR = 1.69; 95% CI = 1.66-1.72; 3 years versus 5 years = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.18-1.23) were strongly associated with a nonscreening indication with similar results for ≤9-month surveillance interval. Screening indication and >9-month surveillance intervals were more common in more recent years.

CONCLUSION

Variability in surveillance indications across facilities in the United States supports including indications beyond screening in studies evaluating surveillance mammography effectiveness and demonstrates the need for standardization.

Surveillance for second breast cancer events in women with a personal history of breast cancer using breast MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Women with personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) are currently recommended to receive annual mammography for surveillance of breast cancer recurrence or new primary. However, given issues in accuracy with mammography, there is a need for evolving evidence-based surveillance recommendations with supplemental imaging. In this systematic review, we compiled and compared existing studies that describe the test performance of surveillance breast MRI among women with PHBC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and EMBASE using MeSH terms for studies (2000-2019) that described the diagnostic characteristics of breast MRI in women with PHBC. Search results were reviewed and included based on PICOTS criteria; quality of included articles was assessed using QUADAS-2. Meta-analysis of single proportions was conducted for diagnostic characteristics of breast MRI, including tests of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Our review included 11 articles in which unique cohorts were studied, comprised of a total of 8338 women with PHBC and 12,335 breast MRI done for the purpose of surveillance. We predict intervals (PI) for cancer detection rate per 1000 examinations (PI 9-15; I2 = 10%), recall rate (PI 5-31%; I2 = 97%), sensitivity (PI 58-95%; I2 = 47%), specificity (PI 76-97%; I2 = 97%), and PPV3 (PI 16-40%; I2 = 44%).

CONCLUSIONS

Studies addressing performance of breast MRI are variable and limited in population-based studies. The summary of evidence to date is insufficient to recommend for or against use of breast MRI for surveillance among women with PHBC.

Breast Biopsy During Post-treatment Surveillance of Screen-Detected Breast Cancer Patients Yields High Rates of Benign Findings

BACKGROUND

The incidence of breast biopsy following treatment for breast cancer is not well-characterized. We sought to determine the frequency and outcomes of breast biopsy and the need for subsequent surgery in patients treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS).

METHODS

Using a prospective database, we identified patients in Alberta, Canada, treated with BCS for screen-detected breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) from 2010 to 2014. Post-treatment breast procedures were identified from physician claims data. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify factors associated with biopsy.

RESULTS

We included 2065 patients with a median of 6.4 years of follow-up; most had DCIS (n = 426, 20.6%) or stage I disease (n = 1385, 67.1%). Post-treatment core biopsy was performed in 389 (18.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 17.2-20.6%) patients, and excisional biopsy was performed in 19 (0.9%, 95% CI 0.6-1.4%) patients. The per-patient benign-to-malignant biopsy ratio was 3.2 to 1, and the overall malignancy rate was 6.1% (95% CI 5.1-7.2%). Younger age, proximity to a cancer center, positive margins, and the use of magnetic resonance imaging were associated with biopsy (p < 0.05). Additional surgery was performed in 150 (7.3%, 95% CI 6.2-8.5%) patients; 93 (4.5%, 95% CI 3.6-5.4%) patients underwent mastectomy. Surgery was performed for local recurrence/ipsilateral cancer in 62 (3.0%) patients, contralateral breast cancer in 60 (2.9%) patients, bilateral breast cancer in 3 (0.1%) patients, and benign indications/prophylaxis in 25 (1.2%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

One in five patients required breast biopsy during post-treatment surveillance following BCS and most revealed benign findings. Rates of additional surgery, especially subsequent mastectomy due to ipsilateral or contralateral malignancy, were low. Patients can be reassured of these findings during pre-treatment counseling and post-treatment surveillance.

Supplemental Breast US Screening in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer: A Matched Cohort Study

Background There is limited research on supplemental screening breast US in women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC). Purpose To compare the performance of supplemental screening breast US in women with and women without a PHBC by using a matched cohort. Materials and Methods Consecutive asymptomatic women who underwent radiologist-performed supplemental breast US and mammography between January 2013 and December 2013 at a tertiary referral university hospital were retrospectively identified. Inclusion criteria were negative or benign findings at mammography, follow-up data for at least 1 year, first cancer stage of 0 to II in women with a PHBC, and incidence screening in women without a PHBC. The two groups were matched 1:1 according to age and breast density. Performance measures were compared with McNemar test, generalized estimating equation, or penalized likelihood logistic regression. Results A total of 3226 women with a PHBC were matched with 3226 women without a PHBC (mean age ± standard deviation, 52 years ± 9; mammographic breast density, fatty in 603 and dense in 2623). Fourteen cancers (six screen-detected, eight interval cancers) were found in women with a PHBC and 13 cancers (12 screen-detected, one interval cancer) in women without a PHBC. Supplemental US in women with a PHBC compared with women without a PHBC showed lower sensitivity (43% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 18%, 71%; six of 14 cancers] vs 92% [95% CI: 64%, 100%; 12 of 13 cancers]; P = .03), higher interval cancer rates (2.5 [95% CI: 1.1, 4.9; eight of 3226 women] vs 0.3 [95% CI: 0, 1.7; one of 3226 women] per 1000; P = .02), and higher specificity (92.8% [95% CI: 91.9%, 93.7%; 2982 of 3212 women] vs 89.3% [95% CI: 88.2%, 90.4%; 2870 of 3213 women]; P < .001), respectively. Conclusion Supplemental US screening in women with a personal history of breast cancer had lower sensitivity and higher interval cancer rate but higher specificity relative to women without a personal history of breast cancer. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Lee and Lee in this issue.

Does Medicare-eligible high-risk breast cancer screening MRI target the right women?

INTRODUCTION

MRI is the most sensitive modality to screen for breast cancer, but it is expensive with somewhat limited access. Audit of screening performance should reflect appropriate population targeting.

METHODS

An observational study on consecutively screened high-risk women, assessment of the contralateral breast staging a new cancer, or surveillance in women with prior breast cancer or high-risk lesion in Perth, Western Australia. All breast MRI studies from 1 January 2015 to 7 September 2018 were included. Studies were 3T comprising T2, DWI, ADC and T1-weighted +/- fat saturation +/- IV gadolinium, +/- subtraction. DCE was read on the dynamics or DynaCAD (Invivo, Gainesville, FL, USA). Fellowship-trained breast radiologists blindly double-read by consensus; additional reader/s arbitrated. The reference standard was the histopathology result or cancer registry notification for cancer diagnoses and benign biopsies, benign follow-up imaging or subsequent screening MRI.

RESULTS

Of 993 MRI studies in 554 women, 870 eligible MRI were performed in 471 women, and 706 had a reference standard. Median age was 44 years (range 18-80). The majority of studies (65% 457/706) were screening Medicare rebate-eligible high familial risk; 26% for surveillance after a breast cancer or contralateral staging; 6% screened BRCA carriers. Eleven cancers were diagnosed, eight were MRI-detected. Only two of these were at high-risk screening MRI. Five were detected at staging contralateral ILC, after negative 2D mammography and ultrasound. Cancer prevalence was highest for staging contralateral ILC, at 600/10,000 MRI, for high-risk screening 77/10,000 MRI and surveillance 116/10,000 MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancers were predominantly detected in women undergoing preoperative staging of new invasive lobular carcinoma in the contralateral breast, rather than the Medicare rebate-eligible high-risk screening group.

MRI surveillance for women with a personal history of breast cancer: comparison between abbreviated and full diagnostic protocol

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic performance of breast MRI with abbreviated protocol (AB-MRI) and full ddiagnostic protocol (FDP-MRI) for surveillance of females with a personal history of breast cancer.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we analyzed the outcomes of total 1312 post-operative screening breast MRI matched from 1045 AB-MRI and 677 FDP-MRI, which had histologic confirmation for suspicious MRI findings or 1 year negative follow-up images. This study was approved by the institutional review board and informed patient consent was waved. AB-MRI consists of T₂ weighted scanning and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging including one pre-contrast and two post-contrast scans. We compared the diagnostic performance for recurrent breast cancer in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value, negative-predictive value, and accuracy and area under the curve between the screening AB-MRI and FDP-MRI.

RESULTS

Overall, 13 recurrent tumors among 1312 post-operative cases screened with breast MRI (1.0%) were detected including 8 invasive cancer, 2 cases of in situ cancer, and 3 cases of metastatic lymph nodes. The sensitivity and negative predictive value were 70 vs 100 and 99.5% vs 100% in AB-MRI and FDP-MRI. Specificity, positive predictive value, accuracy, and area under the curve of AB-MRI and FDP-MRI were 98.0% vs 96.9%, 35.0% vs 23.1%, 97.6% vs 97.0%, and 0.840 vs 0.985, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The performance of AB-MRI was comparable to that of FDP-MRI in detecting recurrent breast cancer and decreased false positive cases.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

AB-MRI provides a reliable alternative with similar diagnostic performance and shorter MRI acquisition time.