RESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influence of preoperative breast MRI on mastectomy and reoperation rates in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). METHODS: The MIPA observational study database (7245 patients) was searched for patients aged 18-80 years with pure unilateral DCIS diagnosed at core needle or vacuum-assisted biopsy (CNB/VAB) and planned for primary surgery. Patients who underwent preoperative MRI (MRI group) were matched (1:1) to those who did not receive MRI (noMRI group) according to 8 confounding covariates that drive referral to MRI (age; hormonal status; familial risk; posterior-to-nipple diameter; BI-RADS category; lesion diameter; lesion presentation; surgical planning at conventional imaging). Surgical outcomes were compared between the matched groups with nonparametric statistics after calculating odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS: Of 1005 women with pure unilateral DCIS at CNB/VAB (507 MRI group, 498 noMRI group), 309 remained in each group after matching. First-line mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 20.1% (62/309 patients, OR 2.03) compared to 11.0% in the noMRI group (34/309 patients, p = 0.003). The reoperation rate was 10.0% in the MRI group (31/309, OR for reoperation 0.40) and 22.0% in the noMRI group (68/309, p < 0.001), with a 2.53 OR of avoiding reoperation in the MRI group. The overall mastectomy rate was 23.3% in the MRI group (72/309, OR 1.40) and 17.8% in the noMRI group (55/309, p = 0.111). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to those going directly to surgery, patients with pure DCIS at CNB/VAB who underwent preoperative MRI had a higher OR for first-line mastectomy but a substantially lower OR for reoperation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: When confounding factors behind MRI referral are accounted for in the comparison of patients with CNB/VAB-diagnosed pure unilateral DCIS, preoperative MRI yields a reduction of reoperations that is more than twice as high as the increase in overall mastectomies. KEY POINTS: ⢠Confounding factors cause imbalance when investigating the influence of preoperative MRI on surgical outcomes of pure DCIS. ⢠When patient matching is applied to women with pure unilateral DCIS, reoperation rates are significantly reduced in women who underwent preoperative MRI. ⢠The reduction of reoperations brought about by preoperative MRI is more than double the increase in overall mastectomies.
RESUMEN
Axillary lymphadenopathy is a common side effect of COVID-19 vaccination, leading to increased imaging-detected asymptomatic and symptomatic unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy. This has threatened to negatively impact the workflow of breast imaging services, leading to the release of ten recommendations by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) in August 2021. Considering the rapidly changing scenario and data scarcity, these initial recommendations kept a highly conservative approach. As of 2023, according to newly acquired evidence, EUSOBI proposes the following updates, in order to reduce unnecessary examinations and avoid delaying necessary examinations. First, recommendation n. 3 has been revised to state that breast examinations should not be delayed or rescheduled because of COVID-19 vaccination, as evidence from the first pandemic waves highlights how delayed or missed screening tests have a negative effect on breast cancer morbidity and mortality, and that there is a near-zero risk of subsequent malignant findings in asymptomatic patients who have unilateral lymphadenopathy and no suspicious breast findings. Second, recommendation n. 7 has been revised to simplify follow-up strategies: in patients without breast cancer history and no imaging findings suspicious for cancer, symptomatic and asymptomatic imaging-detected unilateral lymphadenopathy on the same side of recent COVID-19 vaccination (within 12 weeks) should be classified as a benign finding (BI-RADS 2) and no further work-up should be pursued. All other recommendations issued by EUSOBI in 2021 remain valid.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To report mastectomy and reoperation rates in women who had breast MRI for screening (S-MRI subgroup) or diagnostic (D-MRI subgroup) purposes, using multivariable analysis for investigating the role of MRI referral/nonreferral and other covariates in driving surgical outcomes. METHODS: The MIPA observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed breast cancer destined to have surgery as the primary treatment, in 27 centres worldwide. Mastectomy and reoperation rates were compared using non-parametric tests and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 5828 patients entered analysis, 2763 (47.4%) did not undergo MRI (noMRI subgroup) and 3065 underwent MRI (52.6%); of the latter, 2441/3065 (79.7%) underwent MRI with preoperative intent (P-MRI subgroup), 510/3065 (16.6%) D-MRI, and 114/3065 S-MRI (3.7%). The reoperation rate was 10.5% for S-MRI, 8.2% for D-MRI, and 8.5% for P-MRI, while it was 11.7% for noMRI (p ≤ 0.023 for comparisons with D-MRI and P-MRI). The overall mastectomy rate (first-line mastectomy plus conversions from conserving surgery to mastectomy) was 39.5% for S-MRI, 36.2% for P-MRI, 24.1% for D-MRI, and 18.0% for noMRI. At multivariable analysis, using noMRI as reference, the odds ratios for overall mastectomy were 2.4 (p < 0.001) for S-MRI, 1.0 (p = 0.957) for D-MRI, and 1.9 (p < 0.001) for P-MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Patients from the D-MRI subgroup had the lowest overall mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). This analysis offers an insight into how the initial indication for MRI affects the subsequent surgical treatment of breast cancer. KEY POINTS: ⢠Of 3065 breast MRI examinations, 79.7% were performed with preoperative intent (P-MRI), 16.6% were diagnostic (D-MRI), and 3.7% were screening (S-MRI) examinations. ⢠The D-MRI subgroup had the lowest mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). ⢠The S-MRI subgroup had the highest mastectomy rate (39.5%) which aligns with higher-than-average risk in this subgroup, with a reoperation rate (10.5%) not significantly different to that of all other subgroups.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Mastectomía , Mastectomía Segmentaria , Mama , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Cuidados PreoperatoriosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To perform a survey among all European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) radiologist members to gather representative data regarding the clinical use of breast DWI. METHODS: An online questionnaire was developed by two board-certified radiologists, reviewed by the EUSOBI board and committees, and finally distributed among EUSOBI active and associated (not based in Europe) radiologist members. The questionnaire included 20 questions pertaining to technical preferences (acquisition time, magnet strength, breast coils, number of b values), clinical indications, imaging evaluation, and reporting. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, the Chi-square test of independence, and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Of 1411 EUSOBI radiologist members, 275/1411 (19.5%) responded. Most (222/275, 81%) reported using DWI as part of their routine protocol. Common indications for DWI include lesion characterization (using an ADC threshold of 1.2-1.3 × 10-3 mm2/s) and prediction of response to chemotherapy. Members most commonly acquire two separate b values (114/217, 53%), with b value = 800 s/mm2 being the preferred value for appraisal among those acquiring more than two b values (71/171, 42%). Most did not use synthetic b values (169/217, 78%). While most mention hindered diffusion in the MRI report (161/213, 76%), only 142/217 (57%) report ADC values. CONCLUSION: The utilization of DWI in clinical practice among EUSOBI radiologists who responded to the survey is generally in line with international recommendations, with the main application being the differentiation of benign and malignant enhancing lesions, treatment response assessment, and prediction of response to chemotherapy. Report integration of qualitative and quantitative DWI data is not uniform. KEY POINTS: ⢠Clinical performance of breast DWI is in good agreement with the current recommendations of the EUSOBI International Breast DWI working group. ⢠Breast DWI applications in clinical practice include the differentiation of benign and malignant enhancing, treatment response assessment, and prediction of response to chemotherapy. ⢠Report integration of DWI results is not uniform.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Imagen de Difusión por Resonancia Magnética , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Imagen de Difusión por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Breast density is an independent risk factor for the development of breast cancer and also decreases the sensitivity of mammography for screening. Consequently, women with extremely dense breasts face an increased risk of late diagnosis of breast cancer. These women are, therefore, underserved with current mammographic screening programs. The results of recent studies reporting on contrast-enhanced breast MRI as a screening method in women with extremely dense breasts provide compelling evidence that this approach can enable an important reduction in breast cancer mortality for these women and is cost-effective. Because there is now a valid option to improve breast cancer screening, the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) recommends that women should be informed about their breast density. EUSOBI thus calls on all providers of mammography screening to share density information with the women being screened. In light of the available evidence, in women aged 50 to 70 years with extremely dense breasts, the EUSOBI now recommends offering screening breast MRI every 2 to 4 years. The EUSOBI acknowledges that it may currently not be possible to offer breast MRI immediately and everywhere and underscores that quality assurance procedures need to be established, but urges radiological societies and policymakers to act on this now. Since the wishes and values of individual women differ, in screening the principles of shared decision-making should be embraced. In particular, women should be counselled on the benefits and risks of mammography and MRI-based screening, so that they are capable of making an informed choice about their preferred screening method. KEY POINTS: ⢠The recommendations in Figure 1 summarize the key points of the manuscript.
Asunto(s)
Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can inform surgical planning but might cause overtreatment by increasing the mastectomy rate. The Multicenter International Prospective Analysis (MIPA) study investigated this controversial issue. METHODS: This observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with biopsy-proven breast cancer, who underwent MRI in addition to conventional imaging (mammography and/or breast ultrasonography) or conventional imaging alone before surgery as routine practice at 27 centers. Exclusion criteria included planned neoadjuvant therapy, pregnancy, personal history of any cancer, and distant metastases. RESULTS: Of 5896 analyzed patients, 2763 (46.9%) had conventional imaging only (noMRI group), and 3133 (53.1%) underwent MRI that was performed for diagnosis, screening, or unknown purposes in 692/3133 women (22.1%), with preoperative intent in 2441/3133 women (77.9%, MRI group). Patients in the MRI group were younger, had denser breasts, more cancers ≥ 20 mm, and a higher rate of invasive lobular histology than patients who underwent conventional imaging alone (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Mastectomy was planned based on conventional imaging in 22.4% (MRI group) versus 14.4% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). The additional planned mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 11.3%. The overall performed first- plus second-line mastectomy rate was 36.3% (MRI group) versus 18.0% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). In women receiving conserving surgery, MRI group had a significantly lower reoperation rate (8.5% versus 11.7%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians requested breast MRI for women with a higher a priori probability of receiving mastectomy. MRI was associated with 11.3% more mastectomies, and with 3.2% fewer reoperations in the breast conservation subgroup. KEY POINTS: ⢠In 19% of patients of the MIPA study, breast MRI was performed for screening or diagnostic purposes. ⢠The current patient selection to preoperative breast MRI implies an 11% increase in mastectomies, counterbalanced by a 3% reduction of the reoperation rate. ⢠Data from the MIPA study can support discussion in tumor boards when preoperative MRI is under consideration and should be shared with patients to achieve informed decision-making.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Femenino , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Mastectomía , Mastectomía Segmentaria , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cuidados Preoperatorios , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy is a frequent mild side effect of COVID-19 vaccination. European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) proposes ten recommendations to standardise its management and reduce unnecessary additional imaging and invasive procedures: (1) in patients with previous history of breast cancer, vaccination should be performed in the contralateral arm or in the thigh; (2) collect vaccination data for all patients referred to breast imaging services, including patients undergoing breast cancer staging and follow-up imaging examinations; (3) perform breast imaging examinations preferentially before vaccination or at least 12 weeks after the last vaccine dose; (4) in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, apply standard imaging protocols regardless of vaccination status; (5) in any case of symptomatic or imaging-detected axillary lymphadenopathy before vaccination or at least 12 weeks after, examine with appropriate imaging the contralateral axilla and both breasts to exclude malignancy; (6) in case of axillary lymphadenopathy contralateral to the vaccination side, perform standard work-up; (7) in patients without breast cancer history and no suspicious breast imaging findings, lymphadenopathy only ipsilateral to the vaccination side within 12 weeks after vaccination can be considered benign or probably-benign, depending on clinical context; (8) in patients without breast cancer history, post-vaccination lymphadenopathy coupled with suspicious breast finding requires standard work-up, including biopsy when appropriate; (9) in patients with breast cancer history, interpret and manage post-vaccination lymphadenopathy considering the timeframe from vaccination and overall nodal metastatic risk; (10) complex or unclear cases should be managed by the multidisciplinary team.
RESUMEN
Despite its high diagnostic performance, the use of breast MRI in the preoperative setting is controversial. It has the potential for personalized surgical management in breast cancer patients, but two of three randomized controlled trials did not show results in favor of its introduction for assessing the disease extent before surgery. Meta-analyses showed a higher mastectomy rate in women undergoing preoperative MRI compared to those who do not. Nevertheless, preoperative breast MRI is increasingly used and a survey from the American Society of Breast Surgeons showed that 41% of respondents ask for it in daily practice. In this context, a large-scale observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA study) was proposed under the guidance of the European Network for the Assessment of Imaging in Medicine (EuroAIM). The aims were (1) to prospectively and systematically collect data on consecutive women with a newly diagnosed breast cancer, not candidates for neoadjuvant therapy, who are offered or not offered breast MRI before surgery according to local practice; (2) to compare these two groups in terms of surgical and clinical endpoints, adjusting for covariates. The underlying hypotheses are that MRI does not cause additional mastectomies compared to conventional imaging, while reducing the reoperation rate in all or in subgroups of patients. Ninety-six centers applied to a web-based call; 36 were initially selected based on volume and quality standards; 27 were active for enrollment. On November 2018, the target of 7000 enrolled patients was reached. The MIPA study is presently at the analytic phase. Key Points ⢠Breast MRI has a high diagnostic performance but its utility in the preoperative setting is controversial. ⢠A large-scale observational multicenter prospective study was launched to compare women receiving with those not receiving preoperative MRI. ⢠Twenty-seven centers enrolled more than 7000 patients. The study is presently at the analytic phase.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Protocolos de Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Cuidados Preoperatorios , Anciano , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Femenino , Humanos , Mastectomía , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , ReoperaciónRESUMEN
The European Society of Breast Radiology (EUSOBI) established an International Breast DWI working group. The working group consists of clinical breast MRI experts, MRI physicists, and representatives from large vendors of MRI equipment, invited based upon proven expertise in breast MRI and/or in particular breast DWI, representing 25 sites from 16 countries. The aims of the working group are (a) to promote the use of breast DWI into clinical practice by issuing consensus statements and initiate collaborative research where appropriate; (b) to define necessary standards and provide practical guidance for clinical application of breast DWI; (c) to develop a standardized and translatable multisite multivendor quality assurance protocol, especially for multisite research studies; (d) to find consensus on optimal methods for image processing/analysis, visualization, and interpretation; and (e) to work collaboratively with system vendors to improve breast DWI sequences. First consensus recommendations, presented in this paper, include acquisition parameters for standard breast DWI sequences including specifications of b values, fat saturation, spatial resolution, and repetition and echo times. To describe lesions in an objective way, levels of diffusion restriction/hindrance in the breast have been defined based on the published literature on breast DWI. The use of a small ROI placed on the darkest part of the lesion on the ADC map, avoiding necrotic, noisy or non-enhancing lesion voxels is currently recommended. The working group emphasizes the need for standardization and quality assurance before ADC thresholds are applied. The working group encourages further research in advanced diffusion techniques and tailored DWI strategies for specific indications. Key Points ⢠The working group considers breast DWI an essential part of a multiparametric breast MRI protocol and encourages its use. ⢠Basic requirements for routine clinical application of breast DWI are provided, including recommendations on b values, fat saturation, spatial resolution, and other sequence parameters. ⢠Diffusion levels in breast lesions are defined based on meta-analysis data and methods to obtain a reliable ADC value are detailed.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Imagen de Difusión por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Mama/patología , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Consenso , Femenino , Humanos , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the breast is a MRI sequence that shows several advantages when compared to the dynamic contrast-enhanced sequence: it does not need intravenous contrast, it is relatively quick and easy to implement (artifacts notwithstanding). In this review, the current applications of DWI for lesion characterization and prognosis as well as for response evaluation are analyzed from the point of view of the necessary steps to become a useful surrogate of underlying biological processes (tissue architecture and cellularity): from the proof of concept, to the proof of mechanism, the proof of principle and finally the proof of effectiveness. Future applications of DWI in screening, DWI modeling and radiomics are also discussed.
RESUMEN
This article summarises the information that should be provided to women and referring physicians about breast ultrasound (US). After explaining the physical principles, technical procedure and safety of US, information is given about its ability to make a correct diagnosis, depending on the setting in which it is applied. The following definite indications for breast US in female subjects are proposed: palpable lump; axillary adenopathy; first diagnostic approach for clinical abnormalities under 40 and in pregnant or lactating women; suspicious abnormalities at mammography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); suspicious nipple discharge; recent nipple inversion; skin retraction; breast inflammation; abnormalities in the area of the surgical scar after breast conserving surgery or mastectomy; abnormalities in the presence of breast implants; screening high-risk women, especially when MRI is not performed; loco-regional staging of a known breast cancer, when MRI is not performed; guidance for percutaneous interventions (needle biopsy, pre-surgical localisation, fluid collection drainage); monitoring patients with breast cancer receiving neo-adjuvant therapy, when MRI is not performed. Possible indications such as supplemental screening after mammography for women aged 40-74 with dense breasts are also listed. Moreover, inappropriate indications include screening for breast cancer as a stand-alone alternative to mammography. The structure and organisation of the breast US report and of classification systems such as the BI-RADS and consequent management recommendations are illustrated. Information about additional or new US technologies (colour-Doppler, elastography, and automated whole breast US) is also provided. Finally, five frequently asked questions are answered. TEACHING POINTS: ⢠US is an established tool for suspected cancers at all ages and also the method of choice under 40. ⢠For US-visible suspicious lesions, US-guided biopsy is preferred, even for palpable findings. ⢠High-risk women can be screened with US, especially when MRI cannot be performed. ⢠Supplemental US increases cancer detection but also false positives, biopsy rate and follow-up exams. ⢠Breast US is inappropriate as a stand-alone screening method.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered a helpful diagnostic tool in breast imaging, discussions are ongoing about appropriate protocols and indications. The European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) launched a survey to evaluate the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice. METHODS: An online survey reviewed by the EUSOBI board and committees was distributed amongst members. The questions encompassed: training and experience; annual breast MRI and MRI-guided-intervention workload; examination protocols; indications; reporting habits and preferences. Data were summarised and subgroups compared using χ2 test. RESULTS: Of 647 EUSOBI members, 177 (27.4%) answered the survey. The majority were radiologists (90.5%), half of them based in academic centres (51.9%). Common indications for MRI included cancer staging, treatment monitoring, high-risk screening and problem-solving, and differed significantly between countries (p≤0.03). Structured reporting and BI-RADS were mostly used. Breast radiologists with ≤10 years of experience preferred inclusion of additional techniques, such as T2/STIR (p=0.03) and DWI (p=0.08) in the scan protocol. MRI-guided interventions were performed by a minority of participants (35.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice is generally in line with international recommendations. There are substantial differences between countries. MRI-guided interventions and functional MRI parameters are not widely available. KEY POINTS: ⢠MRI is commonly used for the detection and characterisation of breast lesions. ⢠Clinical practice standards are generally in line with current recommendations. ⢠Standardised criteria and diagnostic categories (mainly BI-RADS) are widely adopted. ⢠Younger radiologists value additional techniques, such as T2/STIR and DWI. ⢠MRI-guided breast biopsy is not widely available.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Mama/patología , Biopsia Guiada por Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/estadística & datos numéricos , Sociedades Médicas , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Anciano , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) yields several parameters that have not been tested in response evaluation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare in reference to histopathology findings the ability of DTI and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI to monitor response to NAC. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: Twenty patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 1.5T MRI axial, bilateral T2 -weighted, DTI, and DCE-MRI. ASSESSMENT: A standardized blinded image analysis at pixel resolution generated color-coded maps of DTI and DCE parameters STATISTICAL TESTS: Pearson's correlation analysis and Bland-Altman plots of the DTI and DCE size changes and of the pathological final residual tumor diameter and DCE or DTI final diameter, from pre- to post-NAC. Spearman coefficient of rank correlation between the DTI and DCE size changes from pre- to post-NAC and Miller and Payne (M&P) pathological response grading. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses to differentiate between responders to nonresponders on the basis of the DTI and DCE percent size changes and the changes in DTI parameters. RESULTS: DTI and DCE changes in the cancers' diameter and volume from pre- to post-NAC exhibited high and significant Pearson correlation (r = 0.82 P = 1.2 × 10-5 ). The DTI volume changes exhibited a significant Spearman coefficient rank correlation (0.68, P = 0.001) with the pathological M&P grading and differentiated between responders and nonresponders with area-under-the-curve (AUC) of 0.83 ± 0.10. A similar AUC for differentiating responders from nonresponders was exhibited by the changes in the highest diffusion coefficient (0.84 ± 0.11) and the mean diffusivity (0.83 ± 0.11). The DTI residual-tumor-diameter showed a high and significant Pearson correlation (r = 0.87 P = 1.2 × 10-6 ) to pathology tumor diameter. DATA CONCLUSION: DTI monitors changes in cancer size and diffusion tensor parameters in response to NAC with an accuracy equivalent to that of DCE, enabling differentiation of responders from nonresponders and assessment of residual tumor size in high congruence with pathology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 4 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1080-1090.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Imagen de Difusión Tensora/métodos , Terapia Neoadyuvante/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Medios de Contraste , Estudios de Evaluación como Asunto , Femenino , Humanos , Aumento de la Imagen/métodos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
This article summarises the information to be offered to women about mammography. After a delineation of the aim of early diagnosis of breast cancer, the difference between screening mammography and diagnostic mammography is explained. The need to bring images and reports from the previous mammogram (and from other recent breast imaging examinations) is highlighted. Mammography technique and procedure are described with particular attention to discomfort and pain experienced by a small number of women who undergo the test. Information is given on the recall during a screening programme and on the request for further work-up after a diagnostic mammography. The logic of the mammography report and of classification systems such as R1-R5 and BI-RADS is illustrated, and brief but clear information is given about the diagnostic performance of the test, with particular reference to interval cancers, i.e., those cancers that are missed at screening mammography. Moreover, the breast cancer risk due to radiation exposure from mammography is compared to the reduction in mortality obtained with the test, and the concept of overdiagnosis is presented with a reliable estimation of its extent. Information about new mammographic technologies (tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography) is also given. Finally, frequently asked questions are answered. KEY POINTS: ⢠Direct digital mammography should be preferred to film-screen or phosphor plates. ⢠Screening (in asymptomatic women) should be distinguished from diagnosis (in symptomatic women). ⢠A breast symptom has to be considered even after a negative mammogram. ⢠Digital breast tomosynthesis increases cancer detection and decreases the recall rate. ⢠Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography can help in cancer detection and lesion characterisation.
RESUMEN
EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support mammography for population-based screening, demonstrated to reduce breast cancer (BC) mortality and treatment impact. According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the reduction in mortality is 40 % for women aged 50-69 years taking up the invitation while the probability of false-positive needle biopsy is <1 % per round and overdiagnosis is only 1-10 % for a 20-year screening. Mortality reduction was also observed for the age groups 40-49 years and 70-74 years, although with "limited evidence". Thus, we firstly recommend biennial screening mammography for average-risk women aged 50-69 years; extension up to 73 or 75 years, biennially, is a second priority, from 40-45 to 49 years, annually, a third priority. Screening with thermography or other optical tools as alternatives to mammography is discouraged. Preference should be given to population screening programmes on a territorial basis, with double reading. Adoption of digital mammography (not film-screen or phosphor-plate computer radiography) is a priority, which also improves sensitivity in dense breasts. Radiologists qualified as screening readers should be involved in programmes. Digital breast tomosynthesis is also set to become "routine mammography" in the screening setting in the next future. Dedicated pathways for high-risk women offering breast MRI according to national or international guidelines and recommendations are encouraged. KEY POINTS: ⢠EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support screening mammography. ⢠A first priority is double-reading biennial mammography for women aged 50-69 years. ⢠Extension to 73-75 and from 40-45 to 49 years is also encouraged. ⢠Digital mammography (not film-screen or computer radiography) should be used. ⢠DBT is set to become "routine mammography" in the screening setting in the next future.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/organización & administración , Adulto , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/prevención & control , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medio OrienteRESUMEN
UNLABELLED: This paper summarizes information about breast MRI to be provided to women and referring physicians. After listing contraindications, procedure details are described, stressing the need for correct scheduling and not moving during the examination. The structured report including BI-RADS® categories and further actions after a breast MRI examination are discussed. Breast MRI is a very sensitive modality, significantly improving screening in high-risk women. It also has a role in clinical diagnosis, problem solving, and staging, impacting on patient management. However, it is not a perfect test, and occasionally breast cancers can be missed. Therefore, clinical and other imaging findings (from mammography/ultrasound) should also be considered. Conversely, MRI may detect lesions not visible on other imaging modalities turning out to be benign (false positives). These risks should be discussed with women before a breast MRI is requested/performed. Because breast MRI drawbacks depend upon the indication for the examination, basic information for the most important breast MRI indications is presented. Seventeen notes and five frequently asked questions formulated for use as direct communication to women are provided. The text was reviewed by Europa Donna-The European Breast Cancer Coalition to ensure that it can be easily understood by women undergoing MRI. KEY POINTS: ⢠Information on breast MRI concerns advantages/disadvantages and preparation to the examination ⢠Claustrophobia, implantable devices, allergic predisposition, and renal function should be checked ⢠Before menopause, scheduling on day 7-14 of the cycle is preferred ⢠During the examination, it is highly important that the patient keeps still ⢠Availability of prior examinations improves accuracy of breast MRI interpretation.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Mama/patología , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , HumanosRESUMEN
The increase in the detection of occult lesions has led to the development of new localisation methods using radiopharmaceutical products. The use of these products allows us to perform a "thrifty" (less-aggressive) surgical excision and, to simultaneously carry out the biopsy of the sentinel node in cases of breast cancer. On making a search for the most up to date references on this particular topic, we found many articles on radioguided surgery by many leading international work groups. These articles clearly show the advantages of the radioguided surgery method, its effectiveness and attractiveness to surgeons who are very much involved in the search for excellence in their daily work. We also contribute our experience as a functional group, with 413 interventions on occult lesions performed using the radioguided method (ROLL). In 229 cases out of these 413, we found a malignancy (75%); in all these 229 cases it was possible to perform the intervention simultaneously with the biopsy of the sentinel node (SNOLL), during the same surgical act. However the interest created by the new procedure, it is essential to keep a critical but innovative and reflexive mind on this issue, in order to accurately analyze the results obtained by each group. We must remember that these types of methods involve several clinical specialties and, therefore, each one will have to contribute with the highest efficiency.