RESUMEN
Breast cancer screening guidelines vary for women at intermediate risk (15%-20% lifetime risk) for developing breast cancer across jurisdictions. Currently available risk assessment models have differing strengths and weaknesses, creating difficulty and ambiguity in selecting the most appropriate model to utilize. Clarifying which model to utilize in individual circumstances may help determine the best screening guidelines to use for each individual.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Mamografía , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Mamografía/métodos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The Ugandan Ministry of Health adopted BI-RADS as standard of care in 2016. The authors performed a medical audit of breast ultrasound practices at four tertiary-level hospitals to assess interpretive performance. The authors also determined the effect of a low-cost navigation program linking breast imaging and pathology on the percentage of patients completing diagnostic care. METHODS: The authors retrieved 966 consecutive diagnostic breast ultrasound reports, with complete data, for studies performed on women aged >18 years presenting with symptoms of breast cancer between 2018 and 2020 from participating hospitals. Ultrasound results were linked to tumor registries and patient follow-up. A medical audit was performed according to the ACR's BI-RADS Atlas, fifth edition, and results were compared with those of a prior audit performed in 2013. At Mulago Hospital, an intervention was piloted on the basis of patient navigation, cost sharing, and same-day imaging, tissue sampling, and pathology. RESULTS: In total, 888 breast ultrasound examinations (91.9%) were eligible for inclusion. Compared with 2013, the postintervention cancer detection rate increased from 38 to 148.7 cancers per 1,000 examinations, positive predictive value 2 from 29.6% to 48.9%, and positive predictive value 3 from 62.7% to 79.9%. Specificity decreased from 90.5% to 87.7% and sensitivity from 92.3% to 81.1%. The mean time from tissue sampling to receipt of a diagnosis decreased from 60 to 7 days. The intervention increased the percentage of patients completing diagnostic care from 0% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to establish a culture of continuous quality improvement in breast ultrasound require robust data collection that links imaging results to pathology and patient follow-up. Interpretive performance met BI-RADS benchmarks for palpable masses, except sensitivity. This resource-appropriate strategy linking imaging, tissue sampling, and pathology interpretation decreased time to diagnosis and rates of loss to follow-up and improved the precision of the audit.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Navegación de Pacientes , Ultrasonografía Mamaria , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Uganda , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Auditoría Médica , Anciano , Diagnóstico TardíoRESUMEN
Diversity and inclusion in breast imaging can improve creativity and innovation, enrich the workplace environment, and enhance culturally appropriate care for an increasingly diverse patient population. Current estimates predict the racial and ethnic demographics of the United States population will change markedly by the year 2060, with increases in representation of the Black demographic projected to comprise 15% of the population (currently 13.3%) and the Hispanic/Latinx demographic projected to comprise 27.5% of the population (currently 17.8%). However, matriculation rates for those who are underrepresented in medicine (URM), defined as "racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population," have remained largely stagnant. Black students comprise only 7.1% of medical student matriculants, and Hispanic/Latinx students comprise only 6.2% of medical school matriculants compared to the general population. The matriculation rate of URM students into diagnostic radiology is even lower, with Black trainees comprising 3.1% of radiology residents and Hispanic/Latinx trainees comprising 4.8% of radiology residents. This lack of URM radiology resident representation leads to a lack of URM potential applicants to breast imaging fellowships due to the pipeline effect. Strategies to improve diversity and inclusion in breast imaging include recruiting a diverse breast imaging workforce, establishing robust mentorship and sponsorship programs, fostering an inclusive training and workplace environment, and retaining and promoting a diverse workforce.
RESUMEN
As the population of the United States becomes increasingly diverse, radiologists must learn to both understand and mitigate the impact of health disparities. Significant health disparities persist in radiologic care, including breast imaging. Racial and ethnic minorities, women from lower socioeconomic status, those living in rural areas, and the uninsured bear a disproportionate burden of breast cancer morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no centralized radiology curriculum focusing on breast health disparities available to residents, breast imaging fellows, or practicing breast radiologists. While patient-, provider-, and system-level initiatives are necessary to overcome disparities, our purpose is to describe educational strategies targeted to breast imaging radiologists at all levels to provide equitable care to a diverse population. These strategies may include, but are not limited to, diversifying the breast imaging workforce, understanding the needs of a diverse population, cultural sensitivity and bias training, and fostering awareness of the existing issues in screening mammography access, follow-up imaging, and clinical care.
RESUMEN
Selection of a localization method for nonpalpable breast lesions offers an opportunity for institutions to seek multidisciplinary input to promote value-based, patient-centered care. The diverse range of nonpalpable breast and axillary pathologies identified through increased utilization of screening mammography often necessitates image-guided preoperative localization for accurate lesion identification and excision. Preoperative localization techniques for breast and axillary lesions have evolved to include both wire and nonwire methods, the latter of which include radioactive seeds, radar reflectors, magnetic seeds, and radiofrequency identification tag localizers. There are no statistically significant differences in surgical outcomes when comparing wire and nonwire localization devices. Factors to consider during selection and adoption of image-guided localization systems include physician preference and ease of use, workflow efficiency, and patient satisfaction.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: For breast US interpretation, to assess impact of computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) in original mode or with improved sensitivity or specificity. METHODS: In this IRB approved protocol, orthogonal-paired US images of 319 lesions identified on screening, including 88 (27.6%) cancers (median 7 mm, range 1-34 mm), were reviewed by 9 breast imaging radiologists. Each observer provided BI-RADS assessments (2, 3, 4A, 4B, 4C, 5) before and after CADx in a mode-balanced design: mode 1, original CADx (outputs benign, probably benign, suspicious, or malignant); mode 2, artificially-high-sensitivity CADx (benign or malignant); and mode 3, artificially-high-specificity CADx (benign or malignant). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was estimated under each modality and for standalone CADx outputs. Multi-reader analysis accounted for inter-reader variability and correlation between same-lesion assessments. RESULTS: AUC of standalone CADx was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.72-0.83). For mode 1, average reader AUC was 0.82 (range 0.76-0.84) without CADx and not significantly changed with CADx. In high-sensitivity mode, all observers' AUCs increased: average AUC 0.83 (range 0.78-0.86) before CADx increased to 0.88 (range 0.84-0.90), P < 0.001. In high-specificity mode, all observers' AUCs increased: average AUC 0.82 (range 0.76-0.84) before CADx increased to 0.89 (range 0.87-0.92), P < 0.0001. Radiologists responded more frequently to malignant CADx cues in high-specificity mode (42.7% vs 23.2% mode 1, and 27.0% mode 2, P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Original CADx did not substantially impact radiologists' interpretations. Radiologists showed improved performance and were more responsive when CADx produced fewer false-positive malignant cues.