PPV of the Molecular Breast Imaging Lexicon.

BACKGROUND. Molecular breast imaging (MBI) is used for various breast imaging indications. An MBI lexicon has been developed, although the likelihood of malignancy of the lexicon descriptors has not been assessed to our knowledge. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the PPV for malignancy of the MBI lexicon imaging descriptors. METHODS. This retrospective study included MBI examinations performed from August 1, 2005, through August 31, 2017, that were positive (BI-RADS analogous categories 0, 3, 4, 5, or 6) according to the clinical report and had an available reference standard. Examinations were performed using dual-detector cadmium zinc telluride MBI systems after injection of 99mTc sestamibi. Category 3 lesions had pathologic correlation, at least 2 years of imaging follow-up, or final resolution on follow-up imaging as category 1 or 2; category 4 and 5 lesions had pathologic correlation. MBI examinations were reviewed by one of two radiologists to assess lesions on the basis of the published MBI lexicon for type (mass vs nonmass uptake), distribution (if nonmass uptake), uptake intensity, and number of MBI views on which the lesion was seen. PPV for malignancy was summarized. RESULTS. The analysis included 643 lesions (479 benign, 164 malignant; 83 mass, 560 nonmass uptake) in 509 patients (median age, 56 years). PPV was 73.5% (61/83) for masses and 18.4% (103/560) for nonmass uptake. Among the nonmass uptake lesions, PPV was 36.2% (17/47) for segmental, 20.1% (77/384) for focal, 30.8% (4/13) for diffuse, and 4.3% (5/116) for regional or multiple regional distribution. PPV was 5.3% (5/94) for one view, 15.2% (32/210) for two views, 14.6% (13/89) for three views, and 45.4% (113/249) for four views showing the lesion. PPV was 14.0% (43/307) for mild, 22.4% (51/228) for moderate, and 64.8% (70/108) for marked uptake intensity. CONCLUSION. The MBI lexicon lesion descriptors are associated with likelihood of malignancy. PPV was higher for masses, lesions seen on multiple MBI views, and lesions with marked uptake intensity. Among nonmass uptake lesions, PPV was highest for those with segmental distribution. CLINICAL IMPACT. Insight into the likelihood of malignancy associated with the MBI lexicon descriptors can inform radiologists' interpretations and guide potential future incorporation of the MBI lexicon into the ACR BI-RADS Atlas.

Screening Algorithms in Dense Breasts: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality; however, when used to examine women with dense breasts, its performance and resulting benefits are reduced. Increased breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), ultrasound (US), molecular breast imaging (MBI), MRI, and contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) each have shown improved cancer detection in dense breasts when compared with 2D digital mammography (DM). DBT is the preferred mammographic technique for producing a simultaneous reduction in recalls (i.e., additional imaging). US further increases cancer detection after DM or DBT and reduces interval cancers (cancers detected in the interval between recommended screening examinations), but it also produces substantial additional false-positive findings. MBI improves cancer detection with an effective radiation dose that is approximately fourfold that of DM or DBT but is still within accepted limits. MRI provides the greatest increase in cancer detection and reduces interval cancers and late-stage disease; abbreviated techniques will reduce cost and improve availability. CEM appears to offer performance similar to that of MRI, but further validation is needed. Dense breast notification will soon be a national standard; therefore, understanding the performance of mammography and supplemental modalities is necessary to optimize screening for women with dense breasts.

Background Parenchymal Uptake on Molecular Breast Imaging and Breast Cancer Risk: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND. Background parenchymal uptake (BPU) on molecular breast imaging (MBI) was identified in a case-control study as a breast cancer risk factor beyond mammographic density. To our knowledge, this finding has not yet been confirmed in a cohort study. OBJECTIVE. The objectives of this study were to examine the association of BPU with breast cancer and to estimate the absolute risk and discriminatory accuracy of BPU in a cohort study. METHODS. A retrospective cohort was established that included women without a history of breast cancer who underwent MBI from 2004 to 2015. Radiologists who were blinded to future breast cancer diagnoses assessed BPU on baseline MBI examinations as low (photopenic or minimal) or elevated (mild, moderate, or marked). Associations of BPU with breast cancer were estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models of the time to diagnosis. The 5-year absolute risk was calculated for study subgroups. The discriminatory accuracy of BPU was also assessed. RESULTS. Among 2992 women (mean age, 56.3 years; SD, 10.6 years) who underwent MBI, breast cancer events occurred in 144 women (median follow-up, 7.3 years). Median time to diagnosis after MBI was 4.2 years (range, 0.5-11.6 years). Elevated BPU was associated with a greater breast cancer risk (hazard ratio [HR], 2.39; 95% CI, 1.68-3.41; p ≤ .001). This association remained in postmenopausal women (HR, 3.50; 95% CI, 2.31-5.31; p < .001) but was not significant in premenopausal women (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.72-2.32; p = .39). The 5-year absolute risk of breast cancer was 4.3% (95% CI, 2.9-5.7%) for women with elevated BPU versus 2.5% (95% CI, 1.8-3.1%) for those with low BPU. Postmenopausal women with dense breasts and elevated BPU had a 5-year absolute risk of 8.1% (95% CI, 4.3-11.8%) versus 2.8% (1.8-3.8%) for those with low BPU. Among postmenopausal women, discriminatory accuracy for invasive cancer was improved with the addition of BPU versus use of the Gail risk score alone (C statistic, 65.1 vs 59.1; p = .04) or use of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium risk score alone (C statistic, 66.4 vs 60.4; p = .04). CONCLUSION. BPU on MBI is an independent risk factor for breast cancer, with the strongest association observed among postmenopausal women with dense breasts. In postmenopausal women, BPU provides incremental discrimination in predicting breast cancer when combined with either the Gail model or the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium model. CLINICAL IMPACT. Observation of elevated BPU on MBI may identify a subset of women with dense breasts who would benefit most from supplemental screening or preventive options.

Mammographic Variation Measures, Breast Density, and Breast Cancer Risk.

OBJECTIVE. Our previous work showed that variation measures, which represent breast architecture derived from mammograms, were significantly associated with breast cancer. For replication purposes, we examined the association of three variation measures (variation [V], which is measured in the image domain, and P1 and p1 [a normalized version of P1], which are derived from restricted regions in the Fourier domain) with breast cancer risk in an independent population. We also compared these measures to volumetric density measures (volumetric percent density [VPD] and dense volume [DV]) from a commercial product. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We examined 514 patients with breast cancer and 1377 control patients from a screening practice who were matched for age, date of examination, mammography unit, facility, and state of residence. Spearman rank-order correlation was used to evaluate the monotonic association between measures. Breast cancer associations were estimated using conditional logistic regression, after adjustment for age and body mass index. Odds ratios were calculated per SD increment in mammographic measure. RESULTS. These variation measures were strongly correlated with VPD (correlation, 0.68-0.80) but not with DV (correlation, 0.31-0.48). Similar to previous findings, all variation measures were significantly associated with breast cancer (odds ratio per SD: 1.30 [95% CI, 1.16-1.46] for V, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.35-1.77] for P1, and 1.51 [95% CI, 1.33-1.72] for p1). Associations of volumetric density measures with breast cancer were similar (odds ratio per SD: 1.54 [95% CI, 1.33-1.78] for VPD and 1.34 [95% CI, 1.20-1.50] for DV). When DV was included with each variation measure in the same model, all measures retained significance. CONCLUSION. Variation measures were significantly associated with breast cancer risk (comparable to the volumetric density measures) but were independent of the DV.

Evaluation of LIBRA Software for Fully Automated Mammographic Density Assessment in Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.

Background The associations of density measures from the publicly available Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) software with breast cancer have primarily focused on estimates from the contralateral breast at the time of diagnosis. Purpose To evaluate LIBRA measures on mammograms obtained before breast cancer diagnosis and compare their performance to established density measures. Materials and Methods For this retrospective case-control study, full-field digital mammograms in for-processing (raw) and for-presentation (processed) formats were obtained (March 2008 to December 2011) in women who developed breast cancer an average of 2 years later and in age-matched control patients. LIBRA measures included absolute dense area and area percent density (PD) from both image formats. For comparison, dense area and PD were assessed by using the research software (Cumulus), and volumetric PD (VPD) and absolute dense volume were estimated with a commercially available software (Volpara). Density measures were compared by using Spearman correlation coefficients (r), and conditional logistic regression (odds ratios [ORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) was performed to examine the associations of density measures with breast cancer by adjusting for age and body mass index. Results Evaluated were 437 women diagnosed with breast cancer (median age, 62 years ± 17 [standard deviation]) and 1225 matched control patients (median age, 61 years ± 16). LIBRA PD showed strong correlations with Cumulus PD (r = 0.77-0.84) and Volpara VPD (r = 0.85-0.90) (P < .001 for both). For LIBRA, the strongest breast cancer association was observed for PD from processed images (OR, 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5), although the PD association from raw images was not significantly different (OR, 1.2; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.4; P = .25). Slightly stronger breast cancer associations were seen for Cumulus PD (OR, 1.5; 95% CI: 1.3, 1.8; processed images; P = .01) and Volpara VPD (OR, 1.4; 95% CI: 1.2, 1.7; raw images; P = .004) compared with LIBRA measures. Conclusion Automated density measures provided by the Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment from raw and processed mammograms correlated with established area and volumetric density measures and showed comparable breast cancer associations. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Dose Reduction in Molecular Breast Imaging With a New Image-Processing Algorithm.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine whether application of a proprietary image-processing algorithm would allow a reduction in the necessary administered activity for molecular breast imaging (MBI) examinations. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Images from standard-dose MBI examinations (300 MBq 99mTc-sestamibi) of 50 subjects were analyzed. The images were acquired in dynamic mode and showed at least one breast lesion. Half-dose MBI examinations were simulated by summing one-half of the dynamic frames and were processed with the algorithm under study in both a default and a preferred filter mode. Two breast radiologists independently completed a set of two-alternative forced-choice tasks to compare lesion conspicuity on standard-dose images, half-dose images, and the algorithm-processed half-dose images in both modes. RESULTS. Relative to the standard-dose images, the half-dose images were preferred in 4, the default-filtered half-dose images in 50, and preferred-filtered half-dose images in 76 of 100 readings. Compared with standard-dose images, in terms of lesion conspicuity, the half-dose images were rated better in 2, equivalent in 6, and poorer in 92 of 100 readings. The default-filtered half-dose images were rated better, equivalent, or poorer in 13, 73, and 14 of 100 readings. The preferred-filtered half-dose images were rated as better, equivalent, or poorer in 55, 34, and 11 of 100 readings. CONCLUSION. Compared with that on standard-dose images, lesion conspicuity on images obtained with the algorithm and acquired at one-half the standard dose was equivalent or better without compromise of image quality. The algorithm can also be used to decrease imaging time with a resulting increase in patient comfort and throughput.

Impact of short-term low-dose tamoxifen on molecular breast imaging background parenchymal uptake: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: High background parenchymal uptake (BPU) on molecular breast imaging (MBI) has been identified as a breast cancer risk factor. We explored the feasibility of offering a short-term intervention of low-dose oral tamoxifen to women with high BPU and examined whether this intervention would reduce BPU. METHODS: Women with a history of high BPU and no breast cancer history were invited to the study. Participants had an MBI exam, followed by 30 days of low-dose oral tamoxifen at either 5 mg or 10 mg/day, and a post-tamoxifen MBI exam. BPU on pre- and post-tamoxifen MBI exams was quantitatively assessed as the ratio of average counts in breast fibroglandular tissue vs. average counts in subcutaneous fat. Pre-tamoxifen and post-tamoxifen BPU were compared with paired t tests. RESULTS: Of 47 women invited, 22 enrolled and 21 completed the study (10 taking 5 mg tamoxifen, 11 taking 10 mg tamoxifen). Mean age was 47.7 years (range 41-56 years). After 30 days low-dose tamoxifen, 8 of 21 women (38%) showed a decline in BPU, defined as a decrease from the pre-tamoxifen MBI of at least 15%; 11 of 21 (52%) had no change in BPU (within ± 15%); 2 of 21 (10%) had an increase in BPU of greater than 15%. Overall, the average post-tamoxifen BPU was not significantly different from pre-tamoxifen BPU (1.34 post vs. 1.43 pre, p = 0.11). However, among women taking 10 mg tamoxifen, 5 of 11 (45%) showed a decline in BPU; average BPU was 1.19 post-tamoxifen vs. 1.34 pre-tamoxifen (p = 0.005). In women taking 5 mg tamoxifen, 2 of 10 (20%) showed a decline in BPU; average BPU was 1.51 post-tamoxifen vs.1.53 pre-tamoxifen (p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term intervention with low-dose tamoxifen may reduce high BPU on MBI for some patients. Our preliminary findings suggest that 10 mg tamoxifen per day may be more effective than 5 mg for inducing declines in BPU within 30 days. Given the variability in BPU response to tamoxifen observed among study participants, future study is warranted to determine if BPU response could predict the effectiveness of tamoxifen for breast cancer risk reduction within an individual. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02979301 . Registered 01 December 2016.

Automated volumetric breast density measures: differential change between breasts in women with and without breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Given that breast cancer and normal dense fibroglandular tissue have similar radiographic attenuation, we examine whether automated volumetric density measures identify a differential change between breasts in women with cancer and compare to healthy controls. METHODS: Eligible cases (n = 1160) had unilateral invasive breast cancer and bilateral full-field digital mammograms (FFDMs) at two time points: within 2 months and 1-5 years before diagnosis. Controls (n = 2360) were matched to cases on age and date of FFDMs. Dense volume (DV) and volumetric percent density (VPD) for each breast were assessed using Volpara™. Differences in DV and VPD between mammograms (median 3 years apart) were calculated per breast separately for cases and controls and their difference evaluated by using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. To simulate clinical practice where cancer laterality is unknown, we examined whether the absolute difference between breasts can discriminate cases from controls using area under the ROC curve (AUC) analysis, adjusting for age, BMI, and time. RESULTS: Among cases, the VPD and DV between mammograms of the cancerous breast decreased to a lesser degree (- 0.26% and - 2.10 cm3) than the normal breast (- 0.39% and - 2.74 cm3) for a difference of 0.13% (p value < 0.001) and 0.63 cm3 (p = 0.002), respectively. Among controls, the differences between breasts were nearly identical for VPD (- 0.02 [p = 0.92]) and DV (0.05 [p = 0.77]). The AUC for discriminating cases from controls using absolute difference between breasts was 0.54 (95% CI 0.52, 0.56) for VPD and 0.56 (95% CI, 0.54, 0.58) for DV. CONCLUSION: There is a small relative increase in volumetric density measures over time in the breast with cancer which is not found in the normal breast. However, the magnitude of this difference is small, and this measure alone does not appear to be a good discriminator between women with and without breast cancer.

Combined effect of volumetric breast density and body mass index on breast cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: Breast density and body mass index (BMI) are used for breast cancer risk stratification. We evaluate whether the positive association between volumetric breast density and breast cancer risk is strengthened with increasing BMI. METHODS: The San Francisco Mammography Registry and Mayo Clinic Rochester identified 781 premenopausal and 1850 postmenopausal women with breast cancer diagnosed between 2007 and 2015 that had a screening digital mammogram at least 6 months prior to diagnosis. Up to three controls (N = 3535) were matched per case on age, race, date, mammography machine, and state. Volumetric percent density (VPD) and dense volume (DV) were measured with Volpara™. Breast cancer risk was assessed with logistic regression stratified by menopause status. Multiplicative interaction tests assessed whether the association of density measures was differential by BMI categories. RESULTS: The increased risk of breast cancer associated with VPD was strengthened with higher BMI for both premenopausal (pinteraction = 0.01) and postmenopausal (pinteraction = 0.0003) women. For BMI < 25, 25-30, and ≥ 30 kg/m2, ORs for breast cancer for a 1 SD increase in VPD were 1.24, 1.65, and 1.97 for premenopausal, and 1.20, 1.55, and 2.25 for postmenopausal women, respectively. ORs for breast cancer for a 1 SD increase in DV were 1.39, 1.33, and 1.51 for premenopausal (pinteraction = 0.58), and 1.31, 1.34, and 1.65 (pinteraction = 0.03) for postmenopausal women for BMI < 25, 25-30 and ≥ 30 kg/m2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of volumetric percent density on breast cancer risk is strongest in overweight and obese women. These associations have clinical relevance for informing prevention strategies.

Radiomic Phenotypes of Mammographic Parenchymal Complexity: Toward Augmenting Breast Density in Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.

Purpose To identify phenotypes of mammographic parenchymal complexity by using radiomic features and to evaluate their associations with breast density and other breast cancer risk factors. Materials and Methods Computerized image analysis was used to quantify breast density and extract parenchymal texture features in a cross-sectional sample of women screened with digital mammography from September 1, 2012, to February 28, 2013 (n = 2029; age range, 35-75 years; mean age, 55.9 years). Unsupervised clustering was applied to identify and reproduce phenotypes of parenchymal complexity in separate training (n = 1339) and test sets (n = 690). Differences across phenotypes by age, body mass index, breast density, and estimated breast cancer risk were assessed by using Fisher exact, χ2, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Conditional logistic regression was used to evaluate preliminary associations between the detected phenotypes and breast cancer in an independent case-control sample (76 women diagnosed with breast cancer and 158 control participants) matched on age. Results Unsupervised clustering in the screening sample identified four phenotypes with increasing parenchymal complexity that were reproducible between training and test sets (P = .001). Breast density was not strongly correlated with phenotype category (R2 = 0.24 for linear trend). The low- to intermediate-complexity phenotype (prevalence, 390 of 2029 [19%]) had the lowest proportion of dense breasts (eight of 390 [2.1%]), whereas similar proportions were observed across other phenotypes (from 140 of 291 [48.1%] in the high-complexity phenotype to 275 of 511 [53.8%] in the low-complexity phenotype). In the independent case-control sample, phenotypes showed a significant association with breast cancer (P = .001), resulting in higher discriminatory capacity when added to a model with breast density and body mass index (area under the curve, 0.84 vs 0.80; P = .03 for comparison). Conclusion Radiomic phenotypes capture mammographic parenchymal complexity beyond conventional breast density measures and established breast cancer risk factors. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Pinker in this issue.

Quantitative background parenchymal uptake on molecular breast imaging and breast cancer risk: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Background parenchymal uptake (BPU), which refers to the level of Tc-99m sestamibi uptake within normal fibroglandular tissue on molecular breast imaging (MBI), has been identified as a breast cancer risk factor, independent of mammographic density. Prior analyses have used subjective categories to describe BPU. We evaluate a new quantitative method for assessing BPU by testing its reproducibility, comparing quantitative results with previously established subjective BPU categories, and determining the association of quantitative BPU with breast cancer risk. METHODS: Two nonradiologist operators independently performed region-of-interest analysis on MBI images viewed in conjunction with corresponding digital mammograms. Quantitative BPU was defined as a unitless ratio of the average pixel intensity (counts/pixel) within the fibroglandular tissue versus the average pixel intensity in fat. Operator agreement and the correlation of quantitative BPU measures with subjective BPU categories assessed by expert radiologists were determined. Percent density on mammograms was estimated using Cumulus. The association of quantitative BPU with breast cancer (per one unit BPU) was examined within an established case-control study of 62 incident breast cancer cases and 177 matched controls. RESULTS: Quantitative BPU ranged from 0.4 to 3.2 across all subjects and was on average higher in cases compared to controls (1.4 versus 1.2, p < 0.007 for both operators). Quantitative BPU was strongly correlated with subjective BPU categories (Spearman's r = 0.59 to 0.69, p < 0.0001, for each paired combination of two operators and two radiologists). Interoperator and intraoperator agreement in the quantitative BPU measure, assessed by intraclass correlation, was 0.92 and 0.98, respectively. Quantitative BPU measures showed either no correlation or weak negative correlation with mammographic percent density. In a model adjusted for body mass index and percent density, higher quantitative BPU was associated with increased risk of breast cancer for both operators (OR = 4.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-10.1, and 2.4, 95% CI 1.2-4.7). CONCLUSION: Quantitative measurement of BPU, defined as the ratio of average counts in fibroglandular tissue relative to that in fat, can be reliably performed by nonradiologist operators with a simple region-of-interest analysis tool. Similar to results obtained with subjective BPU categories, quantitative BPU is a functional imaging biomarker of breast cancer risk, independent of mammographic density and hormonal factors.

Molecular Breast Imaging for Screening in Dense Breasts: State of the Art and Future Directions.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this review are to discuss the motivation for supplemental screening, to address molecular breast imaging (MBI) radiation dose concerns, and to provide an updated guide to current MBI technology, clinical protocols, and screening performance. Future directions of MBI are also discussed. CONCLUSION: MBI offers detection of mammographically occult cancers in women with dense breasts. Although MBI has been under investigation for nearly 15 years, it has yet to gain widespread adoption in breast screening.

Background parenchymal uptake on molecular breast imaging as a breast cancer risk factor: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Molecular breast imaging (MBI) is a functional test used for supplemental screening of women with mammographically dense breasts. Additionally, MBI depicts variable levels of background parenchymal uptake (BPU) within nonmalignant, dense fibroglandular tissue. We investigated whether BPU is a risk factor for breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective case-control study of 3027 eligible women who had undergone MBI between February 2004 and February 2014. Sixty-two incident breast cancer cases were identified. A total of 179 controls were matched on age, menopausal status, and MBI year. Two radiologists blinded to case status independently assessed BPU as one of four categories: photopenic, minimal to mild, moderate, or marked. Conditional logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the associations (OR) of BPU categories (moderate or marked vs. minimal to mild or photopenic) and breast cancer risk, adjusted for other risk factors. RESULTS: The median age was 60.2 years (range 38-86 years) for cases vs. 60.2 years (range 38-88 years) for controls (p = 0.88). Women with moderate or marked BPU had a 3.4-fold (95 % CI 1.6-7.3) and 4.8-fold (95 % CI 2.1-10.8) increased risk of breast cancer, respectively, compared with women with photopenic or minimal to mild BPU, for two radiologists. The results were similar after adjustment for BI-RADS density (OR 3.3 [95 % CI 1.6-7.2] and OR 4.6 [95 % CI 2.1-10.5]) or postmenopausal hormone use (OR 3.6 [95 % CI 1.7-7.7] and OR 5.0 [95 % CI 2.2-11.4]). The association of BPU with breast cancer remained in analyses limited to postmenopausal women only (OR 3.8 [95 % CI 1.5-9.3] and OR 4.1 [95 % CI 1.6-10.2]) and invasive breast cancer cases only (OR 3.6 [95 % CI 1.5-8.8] and OR 4.4 [95 % CI 1.7-11.1]). Variable BPU was observed among women with similar mammographic density; the distribution of BPU categories differed across density categories (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first evidence for BPU as a risk factor for breast cancer. Among women with dense breasts, who comprise >40 % of the screening population, BPU may serve as a functional imaging biomarker to identify the subset at greatest risk.

Comparison of Clinical and Automated Breast Density Measurements: Implications for Risk Prediction and Supplemental Screening.

Purpose To compare the classification of breast density with two automated methods, Volpara (version 1.5.0; Matakina Technology, Wellington, New Zealand) and Quantra (version 2.0; Hologic, Bedford, Mass), with clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classifications and to examine associations of these measures with breast cancer risk. Materials and Methods In this study, 1911 patients with breast cancer and 4170 control subjects matched for age, race, examination date, and mammography machine were evaluated. Participants underwent mammography at Mayo Clinic or one of four sites within the San Francisco Mammography Registry between 2006 and 2012 and provided informed consent or a waiver for research, in compliance with HIPAA regulations and institutional review board approval. Digital mammograms were retrieved a mean of 2.1 years (range, 6 months to 6 years) before cancer diagnosis, with the corresponding clinical BI-RADS density classifications, and Volpara and Quantra density estimates were generated. Agreement was assessed with weighted κ statistics among control subjects. Breast cancer associations were evaluated with conditional logistic regression, adjusted for age and body mass index. Odds ratios, C statistics, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. Results Agreement between clinical BI-RADS density classifications and Volpara and Quantra BI-RADS estimates was moderate, with κ values of 0.57 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.59) and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.44, 0.47), respectively. Differences of up to 14% in dense tissue classification were found, with Volpara classifying 51% of women as having dense breasts, Quantra classifying 37%, and clinical BI-RADS assessment used to classify 43%. Clinical and automated measures showed similar breast cancer associations; odds ratios for extremely dense breasts versus scattered fibroglandular densities were 1.8 (95% CI: 1.5, 2.2), 1.9 (95% CI: 1.5, 2.5), and 2.3 (95% CI: 1.9, 2.8) for Volpara, Quantra, and BI-RADS classifications, respectively. Clinical BI-RADS assessment showed better discrimination of case status (C = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.58, 0.61) than did Volpara (C = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.56, 0.59) and Quantra (C = 0.56; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.58) BI-RADS classifications. Conclusion Automated and clinical assessments of breast density are similarly associated with breast cancer risk but differ up to 14% in the classification of women with dense breasts. This could have substantial effects on clinical practice patterns. (©) RSNA, 2015 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Direct-Conversion Molecular Breast Imaging of Invasive Breast Cancer: Imaging Features, Extent of Invasive Disease, and Comparison Between Invasive Ductal and Lobular Histology.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to compare the tumor appearance of invasive breast cancer on direct-conversion molecular breast imaging using a standardized lexicon and to determine how often direct-conversion molecular breast imaging identifies all known invasive tumor foci in the breast, and whether this differs for invasive ductal versus lobular histologic profiles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with prior invasive breast cancer and concurrent direct-conversion molecular breast imaging examinations were retrospectively reviewed. Blinded review of direct-conversion molecular breast imaging examinations was performed by one of two radiologists, according to a validated lexicon. Direct-conversion molecular breast imaging findings were matched with lesions described on the pathology report to exclude benign reasons for direct-conversion molecular breast imaging findings and to document direct-conversion molecular breast imaging-occult tumor foci. Associations between direct-conversion molecular breast imaging findings and tumor histologic profiles were examined using chi-square tests. RESULTS: In 286 patients, 390 invasive tumor foci were present in 294 breasts. A corresponding direct-conversion molecular breast imaging finding was present for 341 of 390 (87%) tumor foci described on the pathology report. Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) tumor foci were more likely to be a mass (40% IDC vs 15% invasive lobular carcinoma [ILC]; p < 0.001) and to have marked intensity than were ILC foci (63% IDC vs 32% ILC; p < 0.001). Direct-conversion molecular breast imaging correctly revealed all pathology-proven foci of invasive disease in 79.8% of cases and was more likely to do so for IDC than for ILC (86.1% vs 56.7%; p < 0.0001). Overall, direct-conversion molecular breast imaging showed all known invasive foci in 249 of 286 (87%) patients. CONCLUSION: Direct-conversion molecular breast imaging features of invasive cancer, including lesion type and intensity, differ by histologic subtype. Direct-conversion molecular breast imaging is less likely to show all foci of ILC compared with IDC.

Diagnostic workup and costs of a single supplemental molecular breast imaging screen of mammographically dense breasts.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine additional diagnostic workup and costs generated by addition of a single molecular breast imaging (MBI) examination to screening mammography for women with dense breasts. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Women with mammographically dense breasts presenting for screening mammography underwent adjunct MBI performed with 300 MBq (99m)Tc-sestamibi and a direct-conversion cadmium-zinc-telluride dual-head gamma camera. All subsequent imaging tests and biopsies were tracked for a minimum of 1 year. The positive predictive value of biopsies performed (PPV3), benign biopsy rate, cost per patient screened, and cost per cancer detected were determined. RESULTS: A total of 1651 women enrolled in the study. Among the 1585 participants with complete reference standard, screening mammography alone prompted diagnostic workup of 175 (11.0%) patients and biopsy of 20 (1.3%) and yielded five malignancies (PPV3, 25%). Results of combined screening mammography plus MBI prompted diagnostic workup of 279 patients (17.6%) and biopsy of 67 (4.2%) and yielded 19 malignancies (PPV3, 28.4%). The benign biopsy rates were 0.9% (15 of 1585) for screening mammography alone and 3.0% (48 of 1585) for the combination (p < 0.001). The addition of MBI increased the cost per patient screened from $176 for mammography alone to $571 for the combination. However, cost per cancer detected was lower for the combination ($47,597) than for mammography alone ($55,851). CONCLUSION: The addition of MBI to screening mammography of women with dense breasts increased the overall costs and benign biopsy rate but also increased the cancer detection rate, which resulted in a lower cost per cancer detected than with screening mammography alone.

Background parenchymal uptake during molecular breast imaging and associated clinical factors.

OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this study were to describe the prevalence of background parenchymal uptake categories observed at screening molecular breast imaging (MBI) and to examine the association of background parenchymal uptake with mammographic density and other clinical factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Adjunct MBI screening was performed for women with dense breasts on previous mammograms. Two radiologists reviewed images from the MBI examinations and subjectively categorized background parenchymal uptake into four groups: photopenic, minimal-mild, moderate, or marked. Women with breast implants or a personal history of breast cancer were excluded. The association between background parenchymal uptake categories and patient characteristics was examined with Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests as appropriate. RESULTS. In 1149 eligible participants, background parenchymal uptake was photopenic in 252 (22%), minimal-mild in 728 (63%), and moderate or marked in 169 (15%). The distribution of categories differed across BI-RADS density categories (p < 0.0001). In 164 participants with extremely dense breasts, background parenchymal uptake was photopenic in 72 (44%), minimal-mild in 55 (34%), and moderate or marked in 37 (22%). The moderate-marked group was younger on average, more likely to be premenopausal or perimenopausal, and more likely to be using postmenopausal hormone therapy than the photopenic or minimal-mild groups (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION. Among women with similar-appearing mammographic density, background parenchymal uptake ranged from photopenic to marked. Background parenchymal uptake was associated with menopausal status and postmenopausal hormone therapy but not with premenopausal hormonal contraceptives, phase of menstrual cycle, or Gail model 5-year risk of breast cancer. Additional work is necessary to fully characterize the underlying cause of background parenchymal uptake and determine its utility in predicting subsequent risk of breast cancer.

Journal club: molecular breast imaging at reduced radiation dose for supplemental screening in mammographically dense breasts.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of supplemental screening molecular breast imaging (MBI) in women with mammographically dense breasts after system modifications to permit radiation dose reduction. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. A total of 1651 asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breasts on prior mammography underwent screening mammography and adjunct MBI performed with 300-MBq (99m)Tc-sestamibi and a direct-conversion (cadmium zinc telluride) gamma camera, both interpreted independently. The cancer detection rate, sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of biopsies performed (PPV3) were determined. RESULTS. In 1585 participants with a complete reference standard, 21 were diagnosed with cancer: two detected by mammography only, 14 by MBI only, three by both modalities, and two by neither. Of 14 participants with cancers detected only by MBI, 11 had invasive disease (median size, 0.9 cm; range, 0.5-4.1 cm). Nine of 11 (82%) were node negative, and two had bilateral cancers. With the addition of MBI to mammography, the overall cancer detection rate (per 1000 screened) increased from 3.2 to 12.0 (p < 0.001) (supplemental yield 8.8). The invasive cancer detection rate increased from 1.9 to 8.8 (p < 0.001) (supplemental yield 6.9), a relative increase of 363%, while the change in DCIS detection was not statistically significant (from 1.3 to 3.2, p =0.250). For mammography alone, sensitivity was 24%; specificity, 89%; and PPV3, 25%. For the combination, sensitivity was 91% (p < 0.001); specificity, 83% (p < 0.001); and PPV3, 28% (p = 0.70). The recall rate increased from 11.0% with mammography alone to 17.6% (p < 0.001) for the combination; the biopsy rate increased from 1.3% for mammography alone to 4.2% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION. When added to screening mammography, MBI performed using a radiopharmaceutical activity acceptable for screening (effective dose 2.4 mSv) yielded a supplemental cancer detection rate of 8.8 per 1000 women with mammographically dense breasts.

Molecular Breast Imaging Biopsy with a Dual-Detector System.

Purpose To develop a molecular breast imaging (MBI)-guided biopsy system using dual-detector MBI and to perform initial testing in participants. Materials and Methods The Stereo Navigator MBI Accessory biopsy system comprises a lower detector, upper fenestrated compression paddle, and upper detector. The upper detector retracts, allowing craniocaudal, oblique, or medial or lateral biopsy approaches. The compression paddle allows insertion of a needle guide and needle. Lesion depth is calculated by triangulation of lesion location on the upper detector at 0° and 15° and relative lesion activity on upper and lower detectors. In a prospective study (July 2022-June 2023), participants with Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 2, 3, 4, or 5 breast lesions underwent MBI-guided biopsy. After injection of 740 MBq technetium 99m sestamibi, craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique MBI (2-minute acquisition per view) confirmed lesion visualization. A region of interest over the lesion permitted depth calculation in the system software. Upper detector retraction allowed biopsy device placement. Specimen images were obtained on the retracted upper detector, confirming sampling of the target. Results Of 21 participants enrolled (mean age, 50.6 years ± 10.1 [SD]; 21 [100%] women), 17 underwent MBI-guided biopsy with concordant pathology. No lesion was observed at the time of biopsy in four participants. Average lesion size was 17 mm (range, 6-38 mm). Average procedure time, including preprocedure imaging, was 55 minutes ± 13 (range, 38-90 minutes). Pathology results included invasive ductal carcinoma (n = 1), fibroadenoma (n = 4), pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia (n = 6), and fibrocystic changes (n = 6). Conclusion MBI-guided biopsy using a dual-head system with retractable upper detector head was feasible, well tolerated, and efficient. Keywords: Breast Biopsy, Molecular Breast Imaging, Image-guided Biopsy, Molecular Breast Imaging-guided Biopsy, Breast Cancer Clinical trial registration no. NCT06058650 © RSNA, 2024.

A Survey of Patient Experience During Molecular Breast Imaging.

Molecular breast imaging (MBI) is one of several options available to patients seeking supplemental screening due to mammographically dense breasts. Patient experience during MBI may influence willingness to undergo the test but has yet to be formally assessed. We aimed to assess patient comfort level during MBI, to compare MBI comfort with mammography comfort, to identify factors associated with MBI discomfort, and to evaluate patients' willingness to return for future MBI. Methods: A 10-question survey was sent by e-mail to patients undergoing MBI between August and December 2022 to obtain quantitative assessments and qualitative opinions about MBI. Results: Of 561 invited patients, 209 (37%) completed the survey and provided study consent. Their average age was 60.1 y (range, 40-81 y). Of the 209 responders, 202 (97%) were presenting for screening MBI, 195 (94%) had dense breasts, and 46 (22%) had a personal history of breast cancer. The average rating of MBI comfort was 2.9 (SD, 1.5; median, 3.0) on a 7-point scale (1 indicating extremely comfortable and 7 indicating extremely uncomfortable). The rating distribution was as follows: 140 (67%) comfortable (rating, 1-3); 24 (12%) neither comfortable nor uncomfortable (rating, 4); and 45 (22%) uncomfortable (rating, 5 or 6). No responders gave a 7 rating. The most frequently mentioned sources of discomfort included breast compression (n = 16), back or neck discomfort (n = 14), and maintaining position during the examination (n = 14). MBI comfort was associated with responder age (74% ≥55 y old were comfortable, versus 53% <55 y old [P = 0.003]) and history of MBI (71% with prior MBI were comfortable, versus 61% having a first MBI [P = 0.006]). Of 208 responders with a prior mammogram, 148 (71%) said MBI is more comfortable than mammography (a significant majority [P < 0.001]). Of 202 responders to the question of whether they were willing to return for a future MBI, 196 (97%) were willing. A notable factor in positive patient experience was interaction with the MBI nuclear medicine technologist. Conclusion: Most responders thought MBI to be a comfortable examination and more comfortable than mammography. Patient experience during MBI may be improved by ensuring back support and soliciting patient feedback at the time of positioning and throughout the examination. Methods under study to reduce imaging time may be most important for improving patient experience.