BI-RADS Category Assignments by GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Google Bard: A Multilanguage Study.

Background The performance of publicly available large language models (LLMs) remains unclear for complex clinical tasks. Purpose To evaluate the agreement between human readers and LLMs for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories assigned based on breast imaging reports written in three languages and to assess the impact of discordant category assignments on clinical management. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included reports for women who underwent MRI, mammography, and/or US for breast cancer screening or diagnostic purposes at three referral centers. Reports with findings categorized as BI-RADS 1-5 and written in Italian, English, or Dutch were collected between January 2000 and October 2023. Board-certified breast radiologists and the LLMs GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (OpenAI) and Bard, now called Gemini (Google), assigned BI-RADS categories using only the findings described by the original radiologists. Agreement between human readers and LLMs for BI-RADS categories was assessed using the Gwet agreement coefficient (AC1 value). Frequencies were calculated for changes in BI-RADS category assignments that would affect clinical management (ie, BI-RADS 0 vs BI-RADS 1 or 2 vs BI-RADS 3 vs BI-RADS 4 or 5) and compared using the McNemar test. Results Across 2400 reports, agreement between the original and reviewing radiologists was almost perfect (AC1 = 0.91), while agreement between the original radiologists and GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and Bard was moderate (AC1 = 0.52, 0.48, and 0.42, respectively). Across human readers and LLMs, differences were observed in the frequency of BI-RADS category upgrades or downgrades that would result in changed clinical management (118 of 2400 [4.9%] for human readers, 611 of 2400 [25.5%] for Bard, 573 of 2400 [23.9%] for GPT-3.5, and 435 of 2400 [18.1%] for GPT-4; P < .001) and that would negatively impact clinical management (37 of 2400 [1.5%] for human readers, 435 of 2400 [18.1%] for Bard, 344 of 2400 [14.3%] for GPT-3.5, and 255 of 2400 [10.6%] for GPT-4; P < .001). Conclusion LLMs achieved moderate agreement with human reader-assigned BI-RADS categories across reports written in three languages but also yielded a high percentage of discordant BI-RADS categories that would negatively impact clinical management. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

A Survey of Publicly Available MRI Datasets for Potential Use in Artificial Intelligence Research.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to bring transformative improvements to the field of radiology; yet, there are barriers to widespread clinical adoption. One of the most important barriers has been access to large, well-annotated, widely representative medical image datasets, which can be used to accurately train AI programs. Creating such datasets requires time and expertise and runs into constraints around data security and interoperability, patient privacy, and appropriate data use. Recognizing these challenges, several institutions have started curating and providing publicly available, high-quality datasets that can be accessed by researchers to advance AI models. The purpose of this work was to review the publicly available MRI datasets that can be used for AI research in radiology. Despite being an emerging field, a simple internet search for open MRI datasets presents an overwhelming number of results. Therefore, we decided to create a survey of the major publicly accessible MRI datasets in different subfields of radiology (brain, body, and musculoskeletal), and list the most important features of value to the AI researcher. To complete this review, we searched for publicly available MRI datasets and assessed them based on several parameters (number of subjects, demographics, area of interest, technical features, and annotations). We reviewed 110 datasets across sub-fields with 1,686,245 subjects in 12 different areas of interest ranging from spine to cardiac. This review is meant to serve as a reference for researchers to help spur advancements in the field of AI for radiology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 6.

AI Applications to Breast MRI: Today and Tomorrow.

In breast imaging, there is an unrelenting increase in the demand for breast imaging services, partly explained by continuous expanding imaging indications in breast diagnosis and treatment. As the human workforce providing these services is not growing at the same rate, the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) in breast imaging has gained significant momentum to maximize workflow efficiency and increase productivity while concurrently improving diagnostic accuracy and patient outcomes. Thus far, the implementation of AI in breast imaging is at the most advanced stage with mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis techniques, followed by ultrasound, whereas the implementation of AI in breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not moving along as rapidly due to the complexity of MRI examinations and fewer available dataset. Nevertheless, there is persisting interest in AI-enhanced breast MRI applications, even as the use of and indications of breast MRI continue to expand. This review presents an overview of the basic concepts of AI imaging analysis and subsequently reviews the use cases for AI-enhanced MRI interpretation, that is, breast MRI triaging and lesion detection, lesion classification, prediction of treatment response, risk assessment, and image quality. Finally, it provides an outlook on the barriers and facilitators for the adoption of AI in breast MRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 6.

Assessment of Hypoxia in Breast Cancer: Emerging Functional MR Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques and Clinical Applications.

Breast cancer is one of the most prevalent forms of cancer affecting women worldwide. Hypoxia, a condition characterized by insufficient oxygen supply in tumor tissues, is closely associated with tumor aggressiveness, resistance to therapy, and poor clinical outcomes. Accurate assessment of tumor hypoxia can guide treatment decisions, predict therapy response, and contribute to the development of targeted therapeutic interventions. Over the years, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) techniques have emerged as promising noninvasive imaging options for evaluating hypoxia in cancer. Such techniques include blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) MRI, oxygen-enhanced MRI (OE) MRI, chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) MRI, and proton MRS (1H-MRS). These may help overcome the limitations of the routinely used dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) techniques, contributing to better diagnosis and understanding of the biological features of breast cancer. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the emerging functional MRI and MRS techniques for assessing hypoxia in breast cancer, along with their evolving clinical applications. The integration of these techniques in clinical practice holds promising implications for breast cancer management. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.

Breast MRI in patients with implantable loop recorder: initial experience.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the feasibility of breast MRI exams and guided biopsies in patients with an implantable loop recorder (ILR) as well as the impact ILRs may have on image interpretation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study examined breast MRIs of patients with ILR, from April 2008 to September 2022. Radiological reports and electronic medical records were reviewed for demographic characteristics, safety concerns, and imaging findings. MR images were analyzed and compared statistically for artifact quantification on the various pulse sequences. RESULTS: Overall, 40/82,778 (0.049%) MRIs during the study period included ILR. All MRIs were completed without early termination. No patient-related or device-related adverse events occurred. ILRs were most commonly located in the left lower-inner quadrant (64.6%). The main artifact was a signal intensity (SI) void in a dipole formation in the ILR bed with or without areas of peripheral high SI. Artifacts appeared greatest in the cranio-caudal axis (p < 0.001), followed by the anterior-posterior axis (p < 0.001), and then the right-left axis. High peripheral rim-like SI artifacts appeared on the post-contrast and subtracted T1-weighted images, mimicking suspicious enhancement. Artifacts were most prominent on diffusion-weighted (p < 0.001), followed by T2-weighted and T1-weighted images. In eight patients, suspicious findings were found on MRI, resulting in four additional malignant lesions. Of six patients with left breast cancer, the tumor was completely visible in five cases and partially obscured in one. CONCLUSION: Breast MRI is feasible and safe among patients with ILR and may provide a significant diagnostic value, albeit with localized, characteristic artifacts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Indicated breast MRI exams and guided biopsies can be safely performed in patients with implantable loop recorder. Nevertheless, radiologists should be aware of associated limitations including limited assessment of the inner left breast and pseudo-enhancement artifacts. KEY POINTS: • Breast MRI in patients with an implantable loop recorder is an infrequent, feasible, and safe procedure. • Despite limited breast visualization of the implantable loop recorder bed and characteristic artifacts, MRI depicted additional lesions in 8/40 (20%) of cases, half of which were malignant. • Breast MRI in patients with an implantable loop recorder should be performed when indicated, taking into consideration typical associated artifacts.

Current use and future perspectives of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM): a survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI).

OBJECTIVES: To perform a survey among members of the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) regarding the use of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM). METHODS: A panel of nine board-certified radiologists developed a 29-item online questionnaire, distributed to all EUSOBI members (inside and outside Europe) from January 25 to March 10, 2023. CEM implementation, examination protocols, reporting strategies, and current and future CEM indications were investigated. Replies were exploratively analyzed with descriptive and non-parametric statistics. RESULTS: Among 434 respondents (74.9% from Europe), 50% (217/434) declared to use CEM, 155/217 (71.4%) seeing less than 200 CEMs per year. CEM use was associated with academic settings and high breast imaging workload (p < 0.001). The lack of CEM adoption was most commonly due to the perceived absence of a clinical need (65.0%) and the lack of resources to acquire CEM-capable systems (37.3%). CEM protocols varied widely, but most respondents (61.3%) had already adopted the 2022 ACR CEM BI-RADS® lexicon. CEM use in patients with contraindications to MRI was the most common current indication (80.6%), followed by preoperative staging (68.7%). Patients with MRI contraindications also represented the most commonly foreseen CEM indication (88.0%), followed by the work-up of inconclusive findings at non-contrast examinations (61.5%) and supplemental imaging in dense breasts (53.0%). Respondents declaring CEM use and higher CEM experience gave significantly more current (p = 0.004) and future indications (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a trend towards academic high-workload settings and its prevalent use in patients with MRI contraindications, CEM use and progressive experience were associated with increased confidence in the technique. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: In this first survey on contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) use and perspectives among the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) members, the perceived absence of a clinical need chiefly drove the 50% CEM adoption rate. CEM adoption and progressive experience were associated with more extended current and future indications. KEY POINTS: • Among the 434 members of the European Society of Breast Imaging who completed this survey, 50% declared to use contrast-enhanced mammography in clinical practice. • Due to the perceived absence of a clinical need, contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is still prevalently used as a replacement for MRI in patients with MRI contraindications. • The number of current and future CEM indications marked by respondents was associated with their degree of CEM experience.

Update on DWI for Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Monitoring.

DWI is a noncontrast MRI technique that measures the diffusion of water molecules within biologic tissue. DWI is increasingly incorporated into routine breast MRI examinations. Currently, the main applications of DWI are breast cancer detection and characterization, prognostication, and prediction of treatment response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In addition, DWI is promising as a noncontrast MRI alternative for breast cancer screening. Problems with suboptimal resolution and image quality have restricted the mainstream use of DWI for breast imaging, but these shortcomings are being addressed through several technologic advancements. In this review, we present an up-to-date assessment of the use of DWI for breast cancer imaging, including a summary of the clinical literature and recommendations for future use.

A Review of the Estimation of Sensitivity and Specificity in the Context of Time-Dependent Outcomes.

Time is an essential element in the field of survival analysis. Time to an event is essential in adjudicating diagnostic utility and determining the effectiveness of treatment. However, time-to-event outcomes-in a sense-are complicated to deal with, since they involve both a binary component, which is the outcome itself (death or recurrence) and a continuous component, which is the time for the occurrence of the outcome. In such scenarios, simpler metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve are insufficient to establish the utility of a diagnostic marker. Given the above constraint, this review discusses established ways in which sensitivity and specificity can be determined and are therefore sufficient in establishing utility in the context of time-dependent outcomes. This review also discusses how studies investigating the sensitivity and specificity of a diagnostic marker in the context of time-dependent outcomes can be improved through the use of existing user-friendly statistical software. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.

Breast PET/MRI Hybrid Imaging and Targeted Tracers.

The recent introduction of hybrid positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) as a promising imaging modality for breast cancer assessment has prompted fervent research activity on its clinical applications. The current knowledge regarding the possible clinical applications of hybrid PET/MRI is constantly evolving, thanks to the development and clinical availability of hybrid scanners, the development of new PET tracers and the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) techniques. In this state-of-the-art review on the use of hybrid breast PET/MRI, the most promising advanced MRI techniques (diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and chemical exchange saturation transfer) are discussed. Current and experimental PET tracers (18 F-FDG, 18 F-NaF, choline, 18 F-FES, 18 F-FES, 89 Zr-trastuzumab, choline derivatives, 18 F-FLT, and 68 Ga-FAPI-46) are described in order to provide an overview on their molecular mechanisms of action and corresponding clinical applications. New perspectives represented by the use of radiomics and AI techniques are discussed. Furthermore, the current strengths and limitations of hybrid PET/MRI in the real world are highlighted. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Multisite MRI Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Repeatability and Reproducibility across 3 T Scanners in a Breast Diffusion Phantom: A BReast Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Multisite (BRIMM) Study.

BACKGROUND: Monoexponential apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and biexponential intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) analysis of diffusion-weighted imaging is helpful in the characterization of breast tumors. However, repeatability/reproducibility studies across scanners and across sites are scarce. PURPOSE: To evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility of ADC and IVIM parameters (tissue diffusivity (Dt ), perfusion fraction (Fp ) and pseudo-diffusion (Dp )) within and across sites employing MRI scanners from different vendors utilizing 16-channel breast array coils in a breast diffusion phantom. STUDY TYPE: Phantom repeatability. PHANTOM: A breast phantom containing tubes of different polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) concentrations, water, fat, and sponge flow chambers, together with an MR-compatible liquid crystal (LC) thermometer. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Bipolar gradient twice-refocused spin echo sequence and monopolar gradient single spin echo sequence at 3 T. ASSESSMENT: Studies were performed twice in each of two scanners, located at different sites, on each of 2 days, resulting in four studies per scanner. ADCs of the PVP and water were normalized to the vendor-provided calibrated values at the temperature indicated by the LC thermometer for repeatability/reproducibility comparisons. STATISTICAL TESTS: ADC and IVIM repeatability and reproducibility within and across sites were estimated via the within-system coefficient of variation (wCV). Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was also computed between IVIM metrics and flow speed. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: ADC and Dt demonstrated excellent repeatability (<2%; <3%, respectively) and reproducibility (both <5%) at the two sites. Fp and Dp exhibited good repeatability (mean of two sites 3.67% and 5.59%, respectively) and moderate reproducibility (mean of two sites 15.96% and 13.3%, respectively). The mean intersite reproducibility (%) of Fp /Dp /Dt was 50.96/13.68/5.59, respectively. Fp and Dt demonstrated high correlations with flow speed while Dp showed lower correlations. Fp correlations with flow speed were significant at both sites. DATA CONCLUSION: IVIM reproducibility results were promising and similar to ADC, particularly for Dt . The results were reproducible within both sites, and a progressive trend toward reproducibility across sites except for Fp . LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.

Introduction of a breast apparent diffusion coefficient category system (ADC-B) derived from a large multicenter MRI database.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an intuitive and generally applicable system for the reporting, assessment, and documentation of ADC to complement standard BI-RADS criteria. METHODS: This was a multicentric, retrospective analysis of 11 independently conducted institutional review board-approved studies from seven institutions performed between 2007 and 2019. Breast Apparent Diffusion coefficient (ADC-B) categories comprised ADC-B0 (ADC non-diagnostic), ADC-B1 (no enhancing lesion), and ADC-B2-5. The latter was defined by plotting ADC versus cumulative malignancy rates. Statistics comprised ANOVA with post hoc testing and ROC analysis. p values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 1625 patients (age: 55.9 years (± 13.8)) with 1736 pathologically verified breast lesions were included. The mean ADC (× 10-3 mm2/s) differed significantly between benign (1.45, SD .40) and malignant lesions (.95, SD .39), and between invasive (.92, SD .22) and in situ carcinomas (1.18, SD .30) (p < .001). The following ADC-B categories were identified: ADC-B0-ADC cannot be assessed; ADC-B1-no contrast-enhancing lesion; ADC-B2-ADC ≥ 1.9 (cumulative malignancy rate < 0.1%); ADC-B3-ADC 1.5 to < 1.9 (0.1-1.7%); ADC-B4-ADC 1.0 to < 1.5 (10-24.5%); and ADC-B5-ADC < 1.0 (> 24.5%). At the latter threshold, a positive predictive value of 95.8% (95% CI 0.94-0.97) for invasive versus non-invasive breast carcinomas was reached. CONCLUSIONS: The breast apparent diffusion coefficient system (ADC-B) provides a simple and widely applicable categorization scheme for assessment, documentation, and reporting of apparent diffusion coefficient values in contrast-enhancing breast lesions on MRI. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The ADC-B system, based on diverse MRI examinations, is clinically relevant for stratifying breast cancer risk via apparent diffusion coefficient measurements, and complements BI-RADS for improved clinical decision-making and patient outcomes. KEY POINTS: • The breast apparent diffusion coefficient category system (ADC-B) is a simple tool for the assessment, documentation, and reporting of ADC values in contrast-enhancing breast lesions on MRI. • The categories comprise ADC-B0 for non-diagnostic examinations, ADC-B1 for examinations without an enhancing lesion, and ADC-B2-5 for enhancing lesions with an increasing malignancy rate. • The breast apparent diffusion coefficient category system may be used to complement BI-RADS in clinical decision-making.

Screening and diagnostic breast MRI: how do they impact surgical treatment? Insights from the MIPA study.

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.

Preoperative breast MRI positively impacts surgical outcomes of needle biopsy-diagnosed pure DCIS: a patient-matched analysis from the MIPA study.

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.

Breast MRI Background Parenchymal Enhancement Categorization Using Deep Learning: Outperforming the Radiologist.

BACKGROUND: Background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) is assessed on breast MRI reports as mandated by the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) but is prone to inter and intrareader variation. Semiautomated and fully automated BPE assessment tools have been developed but none has surpassed radiologist BPE designations. PURPOSE: To develop a deep learning model for automated BPE classification and to compare its performance with current standard-of-care radiology report BPE designations. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: Consecutive high-risk patients (i.e. >20% lifetime risk of breast cancer) who underwent contrast-enhanced screening breast MRI from October 2013 to January 2019. The study included 5224 breast MRIs, divided into 3998 training, 444 validation, and 782 testing exams. On radiology reports, 1286 exams were categorized as high BPE (i.e., marked or moderate) and 3938 as low BPE (i.e., mild or minimal). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A 1.5 T or 3 T system; one precontrast and three postcontrast phases of fat-saturated T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging. ASSESSMENT: Breast MRIs were used to develop two deep learning models (Slab artificial intelligence (AI); maximum intensity projection [MIP] AI) for BPE categorization using radiology report BPE labels. Models were tested on a heldout test sets using radiology report BPE and three-reader averaged consensus as the reference standards. STATISTICAL TESTS: Model performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Associations between high BPE and BI-RADS assessments were evaluated using McNemar's chi-square test (α* = 0.025). RESULTS: The Slab AI model significantly outperformed the MIP AI model across the full test set (area under the curve of 0.84 vs. 0.79) using the radiology report reference standard. Using three-reader consensus BPE labels reference standard, our AI model significantly outperformed radiology report BPE labels. Finally, the AI model was significantly more likely than the radiologist to assign "high BPE" to suspicious breast MRIs and significantly less likely than the radiologist to assign "high BPE" to negative breast MRIs. DATA CONCLUSION: Fully automated BPE assessments for breast MRIs could be more accurate than BPE assessments from radiology reports. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 3.

A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on the implementation of breast diffusion-weighted imaging in clinical practice.

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.

Breast cancer screening in women with extremely dense breasts recommendations of the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI).

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.

Magnetic resonance imaging before breast cancer surgery: results of an observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA).

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.

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

BACKGROUND. Increasing evidence supports the role of abbreviated MRI protocols for breast cancer detection. However, abbreviated protocols have been poorly studied in patients who are BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Furthermore, the need for T2-weighted sequences in abbreviated protocols remains controversial. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare, in the evaluation of patients with BRCA mutations, the diagnostic performance of a standard full breast MRI protocol with the performance of abbreviated protocols that included and did not include a T2-weighted sequence. METHODS. This retrospective study included 292 patients (mean age, 47.9 years) who were BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers who underwent 427 screening breast MRI examinations according to a standard full protocol who could be classified as having benign (n = 407) or malignant (n = 20) findings based on histopathology or imaging follow-up. Four readers independently assessed examinations in three separate sessions (theoretic abbreviated protocol, which included the first postcontrast acquisition; theoretic abbreviated protocol with addition of a T2-weighted sequence; and the standard full protocol) and assigned BI-RADS categories. Categories 3-5 were considered to represent positive examinations. Interreader agreement was assessed, and diagnostic performance was compared by use of pooled reader data. RESULTS. Interreader agreement on BI-RADS category, expressed as kappa values, was 0.55 for the standard, 0.45 for the abbreviated, and 0.57 for the abbreviated plus T2-weighted protocols. Pooled sensitivity was 94% for the standard, 92% for the abbreviated, and 90% for the abbreviated plus T2-weighted protocols (all p > .001). Pooled specificity was 80% for the standard, 71% for the abbreviated, and 83% for the abbreviated plus T2-weighted protocols (p < .001 for abbreviated plus T2-weighted compared with both standard and abbreviated). Pooled PPV was 19% for the standard, 14% for the abbreviated, and 20% for the abbreviated plus T2-weighted protocols (p < .001 for abbreviated compared with both standard and abbreviated). Pooled NPV was 100% for the standard, 99% for the abbreviated, and 99% for the abbreviated plus T2-weighted (all p > .001) protocols. Pooled accuracy was 80% for the standard, 73% for the abbreviated, and 83% for the abbreviated plus T2-weighted protocols (p < .001 for abbreviated compared with both standard and abbreviated plus T2-weighted). CONCLUSION. The abbreviated protocol without T2-weighted imaging had suboptimal performance. However, addition of the T2-weighted sequence yielded comparable sensitivity and accuracy and a small increase in specificity compared with the full protocol. CLINICAL IMPACT. The findings support implementation of abbreviated MRI with T2-weighted imaging for breast cancer screening of patients with BRCA mutations.

Breast conservation and axillary management after primary systemic therapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer: the Lucerne toolbox.

Primary systemic therapy is increasingly used in the treatment of patients with early-stage breast cancer, but few guidelines specifically address optimal locoregional therapies. Therefore, we established an international consortium to discuss clinical evidence and to provide expert advice on technical management of patients with early-stage breast cancer. The steering committee prepared six working packages to address all major clinical questions from diagnosis to surgery. During a consensus meeting that included members from European scientific oncology societies, clinical trial groups, and patient advocates, statements were discussed and voted on. A consensus was reached in 42% of statements, a majority in 38%, and no decision in 21%. Based on these findings, the panel developed clinical guidance recommendations and a toolbox to overcome many clinical and technical requirements associated with the diagnosis, response assessment, surgical planning, and surgery of patients with early-stage breast cancer. This guidance could convince clinicians and patients of the major clinical advancements purported by primary systemic therapy, the use of less extensive and more targeted surgery to improve the lives of patients with breast cancer.

Diagnostic value of radiomics and machine learning with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for patients with atypical ductal hyperplasia in predicting malignant upgrade.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether radiomics features extracted from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of patients with biopsy-proven atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) coupled with machine learning can differentiate high-risk lesions that will upgrade to malignancy at surgery from those that will not, and to determine if qualitatively and semi-quantitatively assessed imaging features, clinical factors, and image-guided biopsy technical factors are associated with upgrade rate. METHODS: This retrospective study included 127 patients with 139 breast lesions yielding ADH at biopsy who were assessed with multiparametric MRI prior to biopsy. Two radiologists assessed all lesions independently and with a third reader in consensus according to the BI-RADS lexicon. Univariate analysis and multivariate modeling were performed to identify significant radiomic features to be included in a machine learning model to discriminate between lesions that upgraded to malignancy on surgery from those that did not. RESULTS: Of 139 lesions, 28 were upgraded to malignancy at surgery, while 111 were not upgraded. Diagnostic accuracy was 53.6%, specificity 79.2%, and sensitivity 15.3% for the model developed from pre-contrast features, and 60.7%, 86%, and 22.8% for the model developed from delta radiomics datasets. No significant associations were found between any radiologist-assessed lesion parameters and upgrade status. There was a significant correlation between the number of specimens sampled during biopsy and upgrade status (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Radiomics analysis coupled with machine learning did not predict upgrade status of ADH. The only significant result from this analysis is between the number of specimens sampled during biopsy procedure and upgrade status at surgery.