ABSTRACT
Image-guided cryoablation is an emerging therapeutic technique for the treatment of breast cancer and is a treatment strategy that is an effective alternate to surgery in select patients. Tumor features impacting the efficacy of cryoablation include size, location in relation to skin, and histology (e.g., extent of intraductal component), underscoring the importance of imaging for staging and workup in this patient population. Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) utilization is increasing in both the screening and diagnostic settings and may be useful for follow-up imaging after breast cancer cryoablation, given its high sensitivity for cancer detection and its advantages in terms of PPV, time, cost, eligibility, and accessibility compared with contrast-enhanced MRI. This Clinical Perspective describes the novel use of CEM after breast cancer cryoablation, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of CEM compared with alternate imaging modalities, expected benign postablation CEM findings, and CEM findings suggestive of residual or recurrent tumor.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Cryosurgery , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Cryosurgery/methods , Contrast Media , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Mammography/methods , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Breast/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate the utility of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) as an alternative to breast MRI for the evaluation of residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment (NAT). METHODS: This prospective study enrolled consecutive women undergoing NAT for breast cancer from July 2017-July 2019. Breast MRI and CEM exams performed after completion of NAT were read independently by two breast radiologists. Residual disease and lesion size on MRI and CEM recombined (RI) and low-energy images (LEI) were compared. Histopathology was considered the reference standard. Statistical analysis was performed using McNemar's and Leisenring's tests. Multiple comparison adjustment was made using Bonferroni procedure. Lesion sizes were correlated using Kendall's tau coefficient. RESULTS: There were 110 participants with 115 breast cancers. Residual disease (invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ) was detected in 83/115 (72%) lesions on pathology, 71/115 (62%) on MRI, 55/115 (48%) on CEM RI, and 75/115 (65%) on CEM LEI. When using multiple comparison adjustment, no significant differences were detected between MRI combined with CEM LEI and CEM RI combined with CEM LEI, in terms of accuracy (MRI: 77%, CEM: 72%; p ≥ 0.99), sensitivity (MRI: 88%, CEM: 81%; p ≥ 0.99), specificity (MRI: 47%, CEM: 50%; p ≥ 0.99), PPV (MRI: 81%, CEM: 81%; p ≥ 0.99), or NPV (MRI: 60%, CEM: 50%; p ≥ 0.99). Size correlation between pathology and both MRI combined with CEM LEI and CEM RI combined with CEM LEI was moderate: τ = 0. 36 vs 0.33 (p ≥ 0.99). CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced mammography is an acceptable alternative to breast MRI for the detection of residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Prospective Studies , Mammography/methods , Breast/pathology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Neoplasm, Residual/pathology , Contrast MediaABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To compare single seed digital breast tomosynthesis-guided radioseed localization (DBT-L) to standard 2D stereotactic-guided radioseed localization (SGL) of the breast. METHODS: A retrospective review of a large tertiary cancer center's database yielded 68 women who underwent preoperative DBT-L from March 2019-December 2019 and a matched cohort of 65 women who underwent SGL during the same period. The electronic medical record and radiology were reviewed for patient characteristics including breast density, exam technique, pre- and post-operative pathology, exam duration, and radiation dose to the patient. To compare margin outcomes between the groups, the chi-square test of independence was used; to compare continuous outcomes such as exam duration and total dose, the Wilcoxon rank sum test was used. RESULTS: DBT-L and SGL localization targets included biopsy marker (62/68, 91% vs 55/65, 85%), distortion (4/68, 6% vs 2/65, <3%), focal asymmetry (1/68 and 1/65, < 2% for both), calcifications (1/68, <2% vs 4/65, 6%), and anatomic landmarks (0% vs 3/65, 5%). 72% and 71% of localizations were performed for malignant pathology in the DBT-L and SGL groups, respectively. The median duration of DBT-L was 8.3 min vs 10.3 min for SGL, representing statistically significant time savings (p = 0.003). The median total organ dose of DBT-L was 8.6 mGy vs 10.4 mGy for SGL, representing statistically significant dose savings (p = 0.018). The incidence of positive margins at surgery was not statistically different between the groups (p = 0.26). CONCLUSION: DBT-L demonstrates both time and dose savings for the patient compared to SGL without compromising surgical outcome.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammography , Female , Humans , Breast/pathology , Breast Density , Retrospective Studies , Image-Guided Biopsy , Breast Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) may provide an alternative to magnetic resonance imaging as a diagnostic exam in women with known or suspected breast cancer or as a screening exam in women at increased risk of breast cancer. Women with breast augmentation, either for oncologic or cosmetic reasons, may fall into this increased risk population and need safe and effective screening and diagnostic imaging tools. Here, we present our clinical practice data in order to demonstrate the feasibility of CEM in women with breast implants. An institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, retrospective review of our tertiary cancer center's database yielded 104 women with breast implants who underwent 198 CEM exams from November 2014 to March 2020. All 198/198 (100%) exams were successfully completed in 104 women. Exam indications included: 174/198 (88%) screening due to increased risk, 10/198 (5%) to evaluate a palpable abnormality, 9/198 (<5%) to evaluate disease extent following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for a known breast malignancy, and 5/198 (<3%) for a 6-month follow-up. 97/104 (93%) women had dense breasts. Routine and implant-displaced low-energy views were obtained with contrast-enhanced images obtained on displaced views for all patients. 197/198 (99.5%) exams yielded no complications. In one exam, the patient experienced mild vasovagal symptoms following the administration of contrast. In conclusion, it is feasible to utilize CEM in both diagnostic and screening capacities in women with breast implants.
Subject(s)
Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Male , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Feasibility Studies , Contrast Media , Mammography/methods , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) has been shown to outperform standard mammography while performing comparably to contrast-enhanced MRI. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare imaging characteristics of false-positive and true-positive findings on CEDM. METHODS. This retrospective study included women who underwent baseline screening CEDM between January 2013 and December 2018 assessed as BI-RADS category 0, 3, 4, or 5 and who underwent biopsy with histopathologic diagnosis or had a 2-year imaging follow-up. Lesion characteristics were extracted from CEDM reports. A true-positive finding was defined as a lesion in which biopsy yielded malignancy. A false-positive finding was defined as a lesion in which biopsy yielded benign or benign high-risk pathology or in which 2-year imaging follow-up was negative. RESULTS. Of 157 patients (median age, 52 years), 24 had a total of 26 true-positive lesions, and 133 had a total of 147 false-positive lesions. Of the 26 true-positive lesions, one (4%) exhibited only a mammographic finding on low-iodine images, 13 (50%) exhibited only a contrast finding on iodine images, and 12 (46%) exhibited both a mammographic finding on low-energy images and a contrast finding on iodine images. A true-positive result was more likely (p = .02) for lesions present on both low-energy images and iodine images (31%) than on low-energy images only (4%) or iodine images only (12%). Among lesions present on both low-energy and iodine images, a true-positive result was more likely (p < .001) when the type of mammographic finding was an asymmetry (46%) or calcification (80%) than a mass (11%) or distortion (0%). A true-positive result was more likely (p = .01) among those with, versus those without, an ultrasound correlate (36% vs 9%) and also was more likely (p = .02) among those with, versus those without, an MRI correlate (18% vs 2%). Of 25 false-positive calcifications, 24 had no associated mammographic enhancement; of five true-positive calcifications, four had mammographic enhancement. CONCLUSION. A low-energy mammographic finding with associated enhancement or a finding with a sonographic or MRI correlate predicts a true-positive result. Calcifications with associated enhancement had a high malignancy rate. Nonetheless, half of true-positive lesions enhanced on iodine images without a mammographic finding on low-energy images. CLINICAL IMPACT. These observations inform radiologists' management of abnormalities detected on screening CEDM.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Iodine , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Contrast Media , Female , Humans , Mammography/methods , Middle Aged , Radiographic Image Enhancement/methods , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: HER2 +- amplified breast cancer patients derive benefit from treatment with anti-HER2-targeted therapy. Though adjuvant treatment is based on final pathology, decisions regarding neoadjuvant chemotherapy are made in the preoperative setting with imaging playing a key role in staging. We examined the accuracy of pre-operative imaging in determining pathological tumor size (pT) in patients undergoing upfront surgery. METHODS: Early (cT1-T2N0) HER2 + breast cancer patients who underwent upfront surgery between 2015 and 2016 were identified from a prospective institutional database. We compared data for both clinical and final pathologic stage. Only those who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), mammography, and ultrasound in the preoperative setting were included in the analysis. Adjuvant treatment regimens were reviewed. RESULTS: We identified 87 cT1-2N0 patients with invasive HER2 + breast cancer who underwent upfront surgery. Median age was 52 years (IQR 43, 58) and median tumor size was 1.1 cm (IQR 0.5, 1.6). Fifteen patients (17%) were upstaged to stage II/III based on final pathology. Thirty-seven patients were T1cN0 on final pathology; 8 were cT1a-bN0 preop and 12 had pT overestimated by MRI by an average of 1.5 cm (> 0.5-1.5 cm). Compared to both mammography and MRI, the imaging modality most predictive of pT was ultrasound (p = 0.000072 ultrasound vs mammography and 0.000042 ultrasound vs MRI). CONCLUSION: For small HER2 + cN0 tumors undergoing upfront surgery, ultrasound was the imaging modality most predictive of pT. MRI overestimated tumor size in approximately 40% of patients. MRI may not accurately discriminate low-volume tumor burden in the breast and carries the potential of overtreatment in the upfront setting.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Female , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Prospective Studies , Receptor, ErbB-2ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE. The objective of this study was to assess to the role of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) as a screening tool in women at intermediate risk for developing breast cancer due to a personal history of lobular neoplasia without additional risk factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In this institutional review board-approved, observational, retrospective study, we reviewed our radiology department database to identify patients with a personal history of breast biopsy yielding lobular neoplasia who underwent screening CEDM at our institution between December 2012 and February 2019. A total of 132 women who underwent 306 CEDM examinations were included. All CEDM examinations were interpreted by dedicated breast imaging radiologists in conjunction with a review of the patient's clinical history and available prior breast imaging. In statistical analysis, sensitivity, specificity, NPV, positive likelihood ratio, and accuracy of CEDM in detecting cancer were determined, with pathology or 12-month imaging follow-up serving as the reference standard. RESULTS. CEDM detected cancer in six patients and showed an overall sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 88% (95% CI, 84-92%), NPV of 100%, and accuracy of 88% (95% CI, 84-92%). The positive likelihood ratio of 8.33 suggested that CEDM findings are 8.3 times more likely to be positive in an individual with breast cancer when compared with an individual without the disease. CONCLUSION. CEDM shows promise as a breast cancer screening examination in patients with a personal history of lobular neoplasia. Continued investigation with a larger patient population is needed to determine the true sensitivity and positive predictive value of CEDM for these patients.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Lobular/diagnostic imaging , Contrast Media , Mammography/methods , Radiographic Image Enhancement/methods , Adult , Aged , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
Intrathecal methotrexate is a standard option for central nervous system-directed therapy in patients with stage III and IV diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. We present a case of a 50-year-old man with stage IV diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with widespread lymphomatous involvement including the central nervous system, who received 7 doses of intrathecal methotrexate via Ommaya catheter. Posttherapy F-FDG-PET/CT imaging demonstrated diffuse, intense intrathecal FDG avidity, without correlative findings on MR spinal imaging. FDG avidity resolved on follow-up. These PET/CT findings are most consistent with methotrexate-induced thecal inflammation, which needs to be distinguished from intrathecal malignancy.
Subject(s)
Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic/adverse effects , Inflammation/diagnostic imaging , Methotrexate/adverse effects , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography/methods , Spinal Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse/drug therapy , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
UNLABELLED: Although guidelines such as those of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network consider (18)F-FDG PET/CT for systemic staging of newly diagnosed stage III breast cancer patients, factors in addition to stage may influence the utility of PET/CT. Because invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is less conspicuous than invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) on (18)F-FDG PET, we hypothesized that tumor histology may be one such factor. We evaluated PET/CT systemic staging of patients newly diagnosed with ILC compared with IDC. METHODS: In this Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective study, our Hospital Information System was screened for ILC patients who underwent PET/CT in 2006-2013 before systemic or radiation therapy. Initial stage was determined from examination, mammography, ultrasound, MR, or surgery. PET/CT was performed to identify unsuspected distant metastases. A sequential cohort of stage III IDC patients was evaluated for comparison. Upstaging rates were compared using the Pearson χ(2) test. RESULTS: The study criteria were fulfilled by 146 ILC patients. PET/CT revealed unsuspected distant metastases in 12 (8%): 0 of 8 with initial stage I, 2 of 50 (4%) stage II, and 10 of 88 (11%) stage III. Upstaging to IV by PET/CT was confirmed by biopsy in all cases. Three of 12 upstaged patients were upstaged only by the CT component of the PET/CT, as the metastases were not (18)F-FDG-avid. In the comparison stage III IDC cohort, 22% (20/89) of patients were upstaged to IV by PET/CT. All 20 demonstrated (18)F-FDG-avid metastases. The relative risk of PET/CT revealing unsuspected distant metastases in stage III IDC patients was 1.98 times (95% confidence interval, 0.98-3.98) that of stage III ILC patients (P = 0.049). For (18)F-FDG-avid metastases, the relative risk of PET/CT revealing unsuspected (18)F-FDG-avid distant metastases in stage III IDC patients was 2.82 times (95% confidence interval, 1.26-6.34) that of stage III ILC patients (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET/CT was more likely to reveal unsuspected distant metastases in stage III IDC patients than in stage III ILC patients. In addition, some ILC patients were upstaged by non-(18)F-FDG-avid lesions visible only on the CT images. Overall, the impact of PET/CT on systemic staging may be lower for ILC patients than for IDC patients.