Relative timing of mammography and MRI for breast cancer screening: Impact on performance evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Mammography and MRI screening typically occur in combination or in alternating sequence. We compared multimodality screening performance accounting for the relative timing of mammography and MRI and overlapping follow-up periods. METHODS: We identified 8,260 screening mammograms performed 2005-2017 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, paired with screening MRIs within +/- 90 days (combined screening) or 91-270 days (alternating screening). Performance for combined screening [cancer detection rate (CDR) per 1000 examinations and sensitivity] was calculated with one-year follow-up for each modality, and with a single follow-up period treating the two tests as a single test. Alternating screening performance was calculated with one-year follow-up for each modality and also with follow-up ending at the next screen if within one year (truncated follow-up). RESULTS: For 3,810 combined screening pairs, CDR per 1000 screens was 6.8 (95%CI: 4.6-10.0) for mammography and 12.3 (95%CI: 9.3-16.4) for MRI as separate tests compared to 13.1 (95%CI: 10.0-17.3) as a single combined test. Sensitivity of each test was 48.1% (35.0%-61.5%) for mammography and 79.7% (95%CI: 67.7-88.0%) for MRI compared to 96.2% (95%CI: 85.9-99.0%) for combined screening. For 4,450 alternating screening pairs, mammography CDR per 1000 screens changed from 3.6 (95%CI: 2.2-5.9) to zero with truncated follow-up; sensitivity was incalculable (denominator=0). MRI CDR per 1000 screens changed from 12.1 (95%CI 9.3-15.8) to 11.7 (95%CI: 8.9-15.3) with truncated follow-up; sensitivity changed from 75.0% (95%CI 63.8-83.6%) to 86.7% (95%CI 75.5-93.2%). DISCUSSION: Updating auditing approaches to account for combined and alternating screening sequencing and to address outcome attribution issues arising from overlapping follow-up periods can improve the accuracy of multimodality screening performance evaluation.

Contrast-enhanced mammography for surveillance in women with a personal history of breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Women with a personal history of breast cancer have an increased risk of subsequent breast malignancy and may benefit from more sensitive surveillance than conventional mammography (MG). We previously reported outcomes for first surveillance episode using contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), demonstrating higher sensitivity and comparable specificity to MG. We now report CEM performance for subsequent surveillance. METHODS: A retrospective study of 1,190 women in an Australian hospital setting undergoing annual surveillance following initial surveillance CEM between June 2016 and December 2022. Outcome measures were recall rate, cancer detection rate, contribution of contrast to recalls, false positive rate, interval cancer rate and characteristics of surveillance detected and interval cancers. RESULTS: 2,592 incident surveillance episodes were analysed, of which 93% involved contrast-based imaging. Of 116 (4.5%) recall episodes, 40/116 (34%) recalls were malignant (27 invasive; 13 ductal carcinoma in situ), totalling 15.4 cancers per 1000 surveillance episodes. 55/116 (47%) recalls were contrast-directed including 17/40 (43%) true positive recalls. Tumour features were similar for contrast-directed recalls and other diagnoses. 8/9 (89%) of contrast-directed invasive recalls were Grade 2-3, and 5/9 (56%) were triple negative breast cancers. There were two symptomatic interval cancers (0.8 per 1000 surveillance episodes, program sensitivity 96%). CONCLUSION: Routine use of CEM in surveillance of women with PHBC led to an increase in the detection of clinically significant malignant lesions, with a low interval cancer rate compared to previous published series. Compared to mammographic surveillance, contrast-enhanced mammography increases the sensitivity of surveillance programs for women with PHBC.

Bridging Gaps: Analyzing Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 0 Rates and Associated Risk Factors in Disproportionally Affected Communities.

Introduction Disparities in access to breast cancer screening led to the creation of the Linda Fenner 3D Mobile Mammography Center (LFMMC), successfully increasing screening for uninsured women in Miami-Dade. However, a higher-than-expected rate of inconclusive mammograms (Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 0) was found, which could lead to unnecessary procedures, stress, costs, and radiation. Methods In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we analyzed data from 3,044 uninsured women aged over 40 (younger if positive family history of breast cancer) from Miami-Dade without breast symptoms or breast cancer history. Women's demographic characteristics, primary language spoken, body mass index (BMI), use of hormone replacement therapy and birth control, history of benign biopsy, breast surgery, family breast cancer, and menopausal status were assessed as potential risk factors for an inconclusive (BI-RADS 0) screening mammogram result. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate associations. Results The average age of women was 51 years (SD = 9); 59% were White, and 30% were African American. The overall frequency of BI-RADS 0 was 35%. Higher odds of BI-RADS 0 were found for women who were younger, single, premenopausal, and with benign biopsy history. Conversely, obesity and breast implant history decreased the odds of BI-RADS 0. Conclusion We found a high frequency of BI-RADS 0 in the LFMMC sample. Potential reasons include a higher risk for breast cancer or a younger sample of women screened. Future research should explore radiologists' reasoning for assigning BI-RADS 0 results and testing alternative screening strategies for younger women.

The verification of the utility of a commercially available phantom combination for quality control in contrast-enhanced mammography.

Contrast-enhanced mammography is being increasingly implemented clinically, providing much improved contrast between tumour and background structures, particularly in dense breasts. Although CEM is similar to conventional mammography it differs via an additional exposure with high energy X-rays (≥ 40 kVp) and subsequent image subtraction. Because of its special operational aspects, the CEM aspect of a CEM unit needs to be uniquely characterised and evaluated. This study aims to verify the utility of a commercially available phantom set (BR3D model 020 and CESM model 022 phantoms (CIRS, Norfolk, Virginia, USA)) in performing key CEM performance tests (linearity of system response with iodine concentration and background subtraction) on two models of CEM units in a clinical setting. The tests were successfully performed, yielding results similar to previously published studies. Further, similarities and differences in the two systems from different vendors were highlighted, knowledge of which may potentially facilitate optimisation of the systems.

Knowledge, Age, and Perceived Social Barriers Regarding Mammography Screening Among Immigrant Arab Women in the United States: A Predictive and Associative Analysis.

Background: Ethnic minority women in the United States continue to experience racial disparities. Immigrant Arab women (IAW) underutilize mammography screening (MS) even compared with other ethnic minorities. This population still has gaps in knowledge regarding breast cancer (BC) and screening methods and encounters social barriers, highlighting the imperative role of the male figure and the family, which hinders screening. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional design with an exploratory and predictive approach was employed to examine knowledge gaps and perceived social barriers associated with MS and to identify predictive factors of MS among IAW in California. The analysis included 316 women that met the eligibility criteria. Results: Familiarity with MS and awareness of screening recommendations were the specific areas of knowledge significantly associated with mammography uptake (odds ratio [OR] 15.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.6-40.8, p < 0.001) and (OR 12.07, 95% CI: 7-21, p < 0.001), respectively. Logistic regression revealed three MS predictors, the two knowledge areas and age. Perceived social barriers were significantly associated with age [F (3,312) = 4.684, p = 0.003]. There was a significant difference in social barriers between women in their 40s and those in their 60s (p = 0.002) and between women in their 50s and those in their 60s (p = 0.003), suggesting lower barriers among women in their 60s (M = 14.3). Living status was significantly associated with perceived social barriers [F (1,314) = 8.83, p = 0.003]. Conclusions: This study offered valuable insights for health care professionals, policymakers, and community organizations working to improve BC early detection in immigrant and ethnic women to reduce social disparities and reinforce social justice. Knowledge-deficit areas and social barriers must be analyzed and incorporated in awareness programs to improve screening practices of IAW.

The ACR Mammography Positioning Improvement Collaborative: A Multi-Center Improvement Program within a Learning Network Framework.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: To share the experience and results of the first cohort of the ACR Mammography Positioning Improvement Collaborative, in which participating sites aimed to increase the mean percentage of screening mammograms meeting the established positioning criteria to 85% or greater and show at least modest evidence of improvement at each site by the end of the improvement program. METHODS: The sites comprising the first cohort of the Collaborative were selected on the basis of strength of local leadership support, intra-organizational relationships, access to data and analytic support, and experience with quality improvement (QI) initiatives. During the improvement program, participating sites organized their teams, developed goals, gathered data, evaluated their current state, identified key drivers and root causes of their problems, and developed and tested interventions. A standardized image quality scoring system was also established. The impact of the interventions implemented at each site was assessed by tracking the percentage of screening mammograms meeting overall passing criteria over time. RESULTS: Six organizations were selected to participate as the first cohort, beginning with participation in the improvement program. Interventions developed and implemented at each site during the program resulted in improvement in the average percentage of screening mammograms meeting overall passing criteria per week from a collaborative mean of 51% to 86%, with four of six sites meeting or exceeding the target mean performance of 85% by the end of the improvement program. Afterwards, all respondents to the post-program survey indicated that the program was a positive experience. CONCLUSION: Using a structured improvement program within a learning network framework, the first cohort of the Collaborative demonstrated that improvement in mammography positioning performance can be achieved at multiple sites simultaneously, and validated the hypothesis that local sites' shared experiences, insights, and learnings would not only improve performance but would also build a community of improvers collaborating to create the best experience for technologists, staff, and patients.

Optimizing angular range in digital breast tomosynthesis: A phantom study investigating lesion detection across varied breast density and thickness.

PURPOSE: To determine the optimal angular range (AR) for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) systems that provides highest lesion visibility across various breast densities and thicknesses. METHOD: A modular DBT phantom, consisting of tissue-equivalent adipose and glandular modules, along with a module embedded with test objects (speckles, masses, fibers), was used to create combinations simulating different breast thicknesses, densities, and lesion locations. A prototype DBT system operated at four ARs (AR±7.5°, AR±12.5°, AR±19°, and AR±25°) to acquire 11 projection images for each combination, with separate fixed doses for thin and thick combinations. Three blinded radiologists independently assessed lesion visibility in reconstructed images; assessments were averaged and compared using linear mixed models. RESULTS: Speckle visibility was highest with AR±7.5° or AR±12.5°, decreasing with wider ARs in all density and thickness combinations. The difference between AR±7.5° and AR±12.5° was not statistically significant, except for the tube-side speckles in thin-fatty combinations (5.83 [AR±7.5°] vs. 5.39 [AR±12.5°], P = 0.019). Mass visibility was not affected by AR in thick combinations, while AR±12.5° exhibited the highest mass visibility for both thin-fatty and thin-dense combinations (P = 0.032 and 0.007, respectively). Different ARs provided highest fiber visibility for different combinations; however, AR±12.5° consistently provided highest or comparable visibility. AR±12.5° showed highest overall lesion visibility for all density and thickness combinations. CONCLUSIONS: AR±12.5° exhibited the highest overall lesion visibility across various phantom thicknesses and densities using a projection number of 11.

Evaluating the impact of delayed-phase imaging in Contrast-Enhanced Mammography on breast cancer staging: A comparative study of abbreviated versus complete protocol.

PURPOSE: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is an innovative imaging tool for breast cancer detection, involving intravenous injection of a contrast medium and the assessment of lesion enhancement in two phases: early and delayed. The aim of the study was to analyze the topographic concordance of lesions detected in the early- versus delayed phase acquisitions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Approved by the Ethics Committee (No. 118/20), this prospective study included 100 women with histopathological confirmed breast neoplasia (B6) at the Radiodiagnostics Department of the Maggiore della Carità Hospital of Novara, Italy from May 1, 2021, to October 17, 2022. Participants underwent CEM examinations using a complete protocol, encompassing both early- and delayed image acquisitions. Three experienced radiologists blindly analyzed the CEM images for contrast enhancement to determine the topographic concordance of the identified lesions. Two readers assessed the complete study (protocol A), while one reader assessed the protocol without the delayed phase (protocol B). The average glandular dose (AGD) of the entire procedure was also evaluated. RESULTS: The analysis demonstrated high concordance among the three readers in the topographical identification of lesions within individual quadrants of both breasts, with a Cohen's κ > 0.75, except for the lower inner quadrant of the right breast and the retro-areolar region of the left breast. The mean whole AGD was 29.2 mGy. The mean AGD due to CEM amounted to 73% of the whole AGD (21.2 mGy). The AGD attributable to the delayed phase of CEM contributed to 36% of the whole AGD (10.5 mGy). CONCLUSIONS: As we found no significant discrepancy between the readings of the two protocols, we conclude that delayed-phase image acquisition in CEM does not provide essential diagnostic benefits for effective disease management. Instead, it contributes to unnecessary radiation exposure.

Unusual metastases to the breast from different extramammary malignancies: a multimodality imaging approach in a case series.

Extramammary metastases are uncommon and usually related to a poor prognosis, but the radiologist can suspect the diagnosis based on the patient's clinical history and specific imaging findings. Several imaging procedures may be used to evaluate breast metastases from different extramammary malignancies, including mammography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and positron emission tomography-CT (PET-CT). The clinical and imaging presentation of these metastases is contingent upon how the illness spreads, however, they have the potential to resemble either benign or malignant breast tumors. Metastases that disseminate hematologically tend to appear as a single round or oval mass with circumscribed margins. Sonographically, they are usually hypoechoic, and with CT or MRI, they usually enhance. Lymphatic dissemination, for example, frequently reveals significant asymmetry with skin thickening and diffuse breast edema, which is compatible with an inflammatory breast carcinoma. Knowing the many types of cancers that have the potential to spread to the breast as well as being able to accurately diagnose them is crucial to prevent a needless mastectomy and provide guidance for subsequent treatment. The purpose of this article is to provide a better understanding of the imaging features and immunohistochemistry (IHC) of secondary tumors of the breast by presenting eight distinctive cases, which will enable radiologists to recognize this entity.

Cat scratch disease unveils hidden breast carcinoma: A diagnostic twist.

Cat scratch disease is a rare condition that can present with different clinical manifestations, including axillary lymphadenopathy. Here, we report the case of a 45-year-old female who presented with axillary lymphadenopathy attributable to a process of differential diagnosis to cat scratch disease. During the thorough investigation of her condition, a routine mammogram was performed, due to the unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy, revealing the presence of previously undiagnosed breast carcinoma in situ; in fact, a DCIS (invasive ductal carcinoma with spread to the ipsilateral axillary nodes) was incidentally found. This case highlights the importance of comprehensive differential diagnosis and a multidisciplinary approach in managing patients with atypical presentations of common diseases, given that other alarming but unrelated findings are visible.

Breast calcifications on mammography from systemic amyloidosis: A case report.

Calcifications on mammography from systemic disease at times meet diagnostic criteria for histologic sampling to exclude malignancy. We present a case of bilateral groups of new calcifications on mammography that yielded amyloidosis on core biopsy. Awareness of our patient's known diagnosis of systemic light chain amyloidosis (AL) prompted use of Congo red staining to confirm the histologic diagnosis. Knowledge of systemic diseases with possible manifestations on mammography can facilitate cogent and clinically relevant radiology-pathology correlation.

Trabecular thickening on mammography post-COVID vaccine and RSV vaccine: Case report.

Ipsilateral axillary adenopathy post-COVID mRNA vaccine has been widely reported and guidelines for management have been established. Isolated changes of axillary tail trabecular thickening without associated adenopathy in the breast present a diagnostic dilemma and no official guidelines have thus far been reported. This finding has been reported after COVID mRNA vaccine and has never been reported with any other vaccine. We report on a patient with such changes on screening mammography 1.5 months after the fifth dose of a COVID-mRNA vaccine and 1 week after RSV vaccine. This raises the possibility that such changes can be seen with vaccines other than the COVID mRNA series of vaccines. The main differential diagnosis includes mastitis and inflammatory breast cancer. The transient nature of this finding with spontaneous resolution at diagnostic mammography and the vaccination history helps to establish the diagnosis and exclude breast cancer.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Female Breast Cancer Screening: 2023 Update.

Early detection of breast cancer from regular screening substantially reduces breast cancer mortality and morbidity. Multiple different imaging modalities may be used to screen for breast cancer. Screening recommendations differ based on an individual's risk of developing breast cancer. Numerous factors contribute to breast cancer risk, which is frequently divided into three major categories: average, intermediate, and high risk. For patients assigned female at birth with native breast tissue, mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis are the recommended method for breast cancer screening in all risk categories. In addition to the recommendation of mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in high-risk patients, screening with breast MRI is recommended. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

The FDA Enhancing Quality Using the Inspection Program (EQUIP) Breast Imaging Quality Initiative. 5-Year Clinical Experience.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of the Enhancing Quality Using the Inspection Program (EQUIP) on quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) at an academic medical center. METHODS: EQUIP audit logs for technologist image quality review as well as mammography unit QA and QC formed the basis for study data. One randomly selected screening mammogram was evaluated by the lead interpreting physician (LIP) using EQUIP criteria for each technologist for each imaging site worked, initially semiannually and then monthly. One randomly selected screening mammogram interpreted by each interpreting physician (IP) for each imaging site was evaluated on a semiannual basis. Quarterly, the LIP reviewed QA and QC logs for each mammography unit with deficiencies further investigated. RESULTS: Of 214 965 eligible screening mammograms performed, 5955 (2.8%) underwent EQUIP image quality review. Five were found to be technically inadequate (0.08%, 5955/214 965). The LIP identified 20 significant interpretive differences compared with the clinical interpretation resulting in 10 biopsies and 7 previously undetected malignancies, with supplemental cancer detection rate of 1.2/1000 cases reviewed. Two hundred ninety mammography unit QA/QC reviews identified 31 potential deficiencies, 29 of which were due to human documentation error (93.4%). CONCLUSION: EQUIP review of both IP and technologists' quality and mammography unit QA/QC logs as performed identified few deficiencies. EQUIP policies should be evaluated at each institution and modified to best utilize resources and provide opportunities for meaningful quality improvement. Although not an EQUIP focus, supplemental cancer detection was observed as might be expected with double reading.

Screening for Breast Cancer: A Comparative Review of Guidelines.

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy diagnosed in the female population worldwide and the leading cause of death among perimenopausal women. Screening is essential, since earlier detection in combination with improvements in breast cancer treatment can reduce the associated mortality. The aim of this study was to review and compare the recommendations from published guidelines on breast cancer screening. A total of 14 guidelines on breast cancer screening issued between 2014 and 2022 were identified. A descriptive review of relevant guidelines by the World Health Organization (WHO), the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the American Cancer Society (ACS), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS), the American College of Radiology (ACR), the Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC), the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) and the Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology (JJCO) for women both at average and high-risk was carried out. There is a consensus among all the reviewed guidelines that mammography is the gold standard screening modality for average-risk women. For this risk group, most of the guidelines suggest annual or biennial mammographic screening at 40-74 years, while screening should particularly focus at 50-69 years. Most of the guidelines suggest that the age limit to stop screening should be determined based on the women's health status and life expectancy. For women at high-risk, most guidelines recommend the use of annual mammography or magnetic resonance imaging, while the starting age should be earlier than the average-risk group, depending on the risk factor. There is discrepancy among the recommendations regarding the age at onset of screening in the various high-risk categories. The development of consistent international practice protocols for the most appropriate breast cancer screening programs seems of major importance to reduce mortality rates and safely guide everyday clinical practice.

Comparison of the effectiveness of contrast-enhanced mammography in detecting malignant lesions in patients with extremely dense breasts compared to the all-densities population.

Purpose: To assess the effectiveness of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) recombinant images in detecting malignant lesions in patients with extremely dense breasts compared to the all-densities population. Material and methods: 792 patients with 808 breast lesions, in whom the final decision on core-needle biopsy was made based on CEM, and who received the result of histopathological examination, were qualified for a single-centre, retrospective study. Patient electronic records and imaging examinations were reviewed to establish demographics, clinical and imaging findings, and histopathology results. The CEM images were reassessed and assigned to the appropriate American College of Radiology (ACR) density categories. Results: Extremely dense breasts were present in 86 (10.9%) patients. Histopathological examination confirmed the presence of malignant lesions in 52.6% of cases in the entire group of patients and 43% in the group of extremely dense breasts. CEM incorrectly classified the lesion as false negative in 16/425 (3.8%) cases for the whole group, and in 1/37 (2.7%) cases for extremely dense breasts. The sensitivity of CEM for the group of all patients was 96.2%, specificity - 60%, positive predictive values (PPV) - 72.8%, and negative predictive values (NPV) - 93.5%. In the group of patients with extremely dense breasts, the sensitivity of the method was 97.3%, specificity - 59.2%, PPV - 64.3%, and NPV - 96.7%. Conclusions: CEM is characterised by high sensitivity and NPV in detecting malignant lesions regardless of the type of breast density. In patients with extremely dense breasts, CEM could serve as a complementary or additional examination in the absence or low availability of MRI.

Mammographic breast features and risk of cardiovascular diseases in korean women.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing amount of evidence on the association between cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and breast calcification. Thus, mammographic breast features have recently gained attention as CVD predictors. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the association of mammographic features, including benign calcification, microcalcification, and breast density, with cardiovascular diseases. METHODS: This study comprised 6,878,686 women aged ≥40 who underwent mammographic screening between 2009 and 2012 with follow-up until 2020. The mammographic features included benign calcification, microcalcification, and breast density. The cardiovascular diseases associated with the mammographic features were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: The prevalence of benign calcification, microcalcification, and dense breasts were 9.6 %, 0.9 % and 47.3 % at baseline, respectively. Over a median follow-up of 10 years, benign calcification and microcalcification were positively associated with an increased risk of chronic ischaemic heart disease whereas breast density was inversely associated with it; the corresponding aOR (95 % CI) was 1.14 (1.10-1.17), 1.19 (1.03-1.15), and 0.88 (0.85-0.90), respectively. A significantly increased risk of chronic ischaemic heart disease (IHD) was observed among women with benign calcifications (aHR, 1.14; 95 % CI 1.10-1.17) and microcalcifications (aOR, 1.19; 95 % CI 1.06-1.33). Women with microcalcifications had a 1.16-fold (95 % CI 1.03-1.30) increased risk of heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Mammographic calcifications were associated with an increased risk of chronic ischaemic heart diseases, whereas dense breast was associated with a decreased risk of cardiovascular disease. Thus, the mammographic features identified on breast cancer screening may provide an opportunity for cardiovascular disease risk identification and prevention.

Reproducibility and Explainability of Deep Learning in Mammography: A Systematic Review of Literature.

Background Although abundant literature is currently available on the use of deep learning for breast cancer detection in mammography, the quality of such literature is widely variable. Purpose To evaluate published literature on breast cancer detection in mammography for reproducibility and to ascertain best practices for model design. Methods The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched to identify records that described the use of deep learning to detect lesions or classify images into cancer or noncancer. A modification of Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (mQUADAS-2) tool was developed for this review and was applied to the included studies. Results of reported studies (area under curve [AUC] of receiver operator curve [ROC] curve, sensitivity, specificity) were recorded. Results A total of 12,123 records were screened, of which 107 fit the inclusion criteria. Training and test datasets, key idea behind model architecture, and results were recorded for these studies. Based on mQUADAS-2 assessment, 103 studies had high risk of bias due to nonrepresentative patient selection. Four studies were of adequate quality, of which three trained their own model, and one used a commercial network. Ensemble models were used in two of these. Common strategies used for model training included patch classifiers, image classification networks (ResNet in 67%), and object detection networks (RetinaNet in 67%). The highest reported AUC was 0.927 ± 0.008 on a screening dataset, while it reached 0.945 (0.919-0.968) on an enriched subset. Higher values of AUC (0.955) and specificity (98.5%) were reached when combined radiologist and Artificial Intelligence readings were used than either of them alone. None of the studies provided explainability beyond localization accuracy. None of the studies have studied interaction between AI and radiologist in a real world setting. Conclusion While deep learning holds much promise in mammography interpretation, evaluation in a reproducible clinical setting and explainable networks are the need of the hour.

Factors influencing U.S. women's interest and preferences for breast cancer risk communication: a cross-sectional study from a large tertiary care breast imaging center.

BACKGROUND: Breast imaging clinics in the United States (U.S.) are increasingly implementing breast cancer risk assessment (BCRA) to align with evolving guideline recommendations but with limited uptake of risk-reduction care. Effectively communicating risk information to women is central to implementation efforts, but remains understudied in the U.S. This study aims to characterize, and identify factors associated with women's interest in and preferences for breast cancer risk communication. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional survey study of U.S. women presenting for a mammogram between January and March of 2021 at a large, tertiary breast imaging clinic. Survey items assessed women's interest in knowing their risk and preferences for risk communication if considered to be at high risk in hypothetical situations. Multivariable logistic regression modeling assessed factors associated with women's interest in knowing their personal risk and preferences for details around exact risk estimates. RESULTS: Among 1119 women, 72.7% were interested in knowing their breast cancer risk. If at high risk, 77% preferred to receive their exact risk estimate and preferred verbal (52.9% phone/47% in-person) vs. written (26.5% online/19.5% letter) communications. Adjusted regression analyses found that those with a primary family history of breast cancer were significantly more interested in knowing their risk (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0, 2.1, p = 0.04), while those categorized as "more than one race or other" were significantly less interested in knowing their risk (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2, 0.9, p = 0.02). Women 60 + years of age were significantly less likely to prefer exact estimates of their risk (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.5, 0.98, p < 0.01), while women with greater than a high school education were significantly more likely to prefer exact risk estimates (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.5, 4.2, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: U.S. women in this study expressed strong interest in knowing their risk and preferred to receive exact risk estimates verbally if found to be at high risk. Sociodemographic and family history influenced women's interest and preferences for risk communication. Breast imaging centers implementing risk assessment should consider strategies tailored to women's preferences to increase interest in risk estimates and improve risk communication.

Associations of State Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Eligibility Policies With Mammography.

PURPOSE: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) addresses food insecurity for low-income households, which is associated with access to care. Many US states expanded SNAP access through policies eliminating the asset test (ie, restrictions based on SNAP applicant assets) and/or broadening income eligibility. The objective of this study was to determine whether state SNAP policies were associated with the use of mammography among women eligible for breast cancer screening. METHODS: Data for income-eligible women 40 to 79 years of age were obtained from the 2006 to 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Difference-in-differences analyses were conducted to compare changes in the percentage of mammography in the past year from pre- to post-SNAP policy adoption (asset test elimination or income eligibility increase) between states that and did not adopt policies expanding SNAP eligibility. RESULTS: In total, 171,684 and 294,647 income-eligible female respondents were included for the asset test elimination policy and income eligibility increase policy analyses, respectively. Mammography within 1 year was reported by 58.4%. Twenty-eight and 22 states adopted SNAP asset test elimination and income increase policies, respectively. Adoption of asset test elimination policies was associated with a 2.11 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-4.15; P = .043) percentage point increase in mammography received within 1 year, particularly for nonmetropolitan residents (4.14 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.07-7.21 percentage points; P = .008), those with household incomes <$25,000 (2.82 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.68-4.97 percentage points; P = .01), and those residing in states in the South (3.08 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.17-5.99 percentage points; P = .038) or that did not expand Medicaid under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (3.35 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.36-6.34; P = .028). There was no significant association between mammography and state-level policies broadening of SNAP income eligibility. CONCLUSIONS: State policies eliminating asset test requirements for SNAP eligibility were associated with increased mammography among low-income women eligible for breast cancer screening, particularly for those in the lowest income bracket or residing in nonmetropolitan areas or Medicaid nonexpansion states.