Mean Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Is a Sufficient Conventional Diffusion-weighted MRI Metric to Improve Breast MRI Diagnostic Performance: Results from the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group A6702 Diffusion Imaging Trial.

Background The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group A6702 multicenter trial helped confirm the potential of diffusion-weighted MRI for improving differential diagnosis of suspicious breast abnormalities and reducing unnecessary biopsies. A prespecified secondary objective was to explore the relative value of different approaches for quantitative assessment of lesions at diffusion-weighted MRI. Purpose To determine whether alternate calculations of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) can help further improve diagnostic performance versus mean ADC values alone for analysis of suspicious breast lesions at MRI. Materials and Methods This prospective trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02022579) enrolled consecutive women (from March 2014 to April 2015) with a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category of 3, 4, or 5 at breast MRI. All study participants underwent standardized diffusion-weighted MRI (b = 0, 100, 600, and 800 sec/mm2). Centralized ADC measures were performed, including manually drawn whole-lesion and hotspot regions of interest, histogram metrics, normalized ADC, and variable b-value combinations. Diagnostic performance was estimated by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Reduction in biopsy rate (maintaining 100% sensitivity) was estimated according to thresholds for each ADC metric. Results Among 107 enrolled women, 81 lesions with outcomes (28 malignant and 53 benign) in 67 women (median age, 49 years; interquartile range, 41-60 years) were analyzed. Among ADC metrics tested, none improved diagnostic performance versus standard mean ADC (AUC, 0.59-0.79 vs AUC, 0.75; P = .02-.84), and maximum ADC had worse performance (AUC, 0.52; P < .001). The 25th-percentile ADC metric provided the best performance (AUC, 0.79; 95% CI: 0.70, 0.88), and a threshold using median ADC provided the greatest reduction in biopsy rate of 23.9% (95% CI: 14.8, 32.9; 16 of 67 BI-RADS category 4 and 5 lesions). Nonzero minimum b value (100, 600, and 800 sec/mm2) did not improve the AUC (0.74; P = .28), and several combinations of two b values (0 and 600, 100 and 600, 0 and 800, and 100 and 800 sec/mm2; AUC, 0.73-0.76) provided results similar to those seen with calculations of four b values (AUC, 0.75; P = .17-.87). Conclusion Mean apparent diffusion coefficient calculated with a two-b-value acquisition is a simple and sufficient diffusion-weighted MRI metric to augment diagnostic performance of breast MRI compared with more complex approaches to apparent diffusion coefficient measurement. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Digital Mammography Has Persistently Increased High-Grade and Overall DCIS Detection Without Altering Upgrade Rate.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to evaluate whether digital mammography (DM) is associated with persistent increased detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or has altered the upgrade rate of DCIS to invasive cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS. An institutional review board-approved retrospective search identified DCIS diagnosed in women with mammographic calcifications between 2001 and 2014. Ipsilateral cancer within 2 years, masses, papillary DCIS, and patients with outside imaging were excluded, yielding 484 cases. Medical records were reviewed for mammographic calcifications, technique, and pathologic diagnosis. Mammograms were interpreted by radiologists certified by the Mammography Quality Standards Act. The institution transitioned from film-screen mammography (FSM) to exclusive DM by 2010. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square test. RESULTS. Of 484 DCIS cases, 158 (33%) were detected by FSM and 326 (67%) were detected by DM. The detection rate was higher with DM than FSM (1.4 and 0.7 per 1000, respectively; p < .001). The detection rate of high-grade DCIS doubled with DM compared with FSM (0.8 and 0.4 per 1000, respectively; p < .001). The prevalent peak of DM-detected DCIS was 2.7 per 1000 in 2008. Incident DM detection remained double FSM (1.4 vs 0.7 per 1000). Similar proportions of high-grade versus low- to intermediate-grade DCIS were detected with both modalities. There was no significant difference in the upgrade rate of DCIS to invasive cancer between DM (10%; 34/326) and FSM (10%; 15/158) (p = .74). High-grade DCIS led to 71% (35/49) of the upgrades to invasive cancer. CONCLUSION. DM was associated with a significant doubling in DCIS and high-grade DCIS detection, which persisted after prevalent peak. The majority of upgrades to invasive cancer arose from high-grade DCIS. DM was not associated with decreased upgrade to invasive cancer.

Annual Screening Mammography Associated With Lower Stage Breast Cancer Compared With Biennial Screening.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare breast cancer characteristics and treatment regimens among women undergoing annual versus nonannual screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS. In this retrospective, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant cohort study, a breast cancer database was queried for patients who received a mammographic or clinical diagnosis of breast cancer during 2016-2017. Annual versus biennial and annual versus nonannual (biennial and triennial) mammography screening cohorts were compared using t tests or Wilcoxon rank sum tests for continuous variables and chi-square or Fisher exact tests for categoric variables. RESULTS. A total of 490 patients were diagnosed with breast cancer during 2016-2017. Among these women, 245 had an assignable screening frequency and were 40-84 years old (mean, 61.8 ± 9.9 [SD] years; median, 62 years). Screening frequency was annual for 200 of these 245 patients (81.6%), biennial for 32 (13.1%), and triennial for 13 (5.3%). Annual screening resulted in fewer late-stage presentations (AJCC stage II, III, or IV in 48 of 200 patients undergoing annual [24.0%] vs 14 of 32 undergoing biennial [43.8%; p = .02] and vs 20 of 45 undergoing nonannual screening [44.4%; p = .006]), fewer interval cancers (21 of 200 for annual [10.5%] vs 12 of 32 for biennial [37.5%; p < .001] and vs 15 of 45 for nonannual [33.3%; p < .001]), and smaller mean tumor diameter (1.4 ± 1.2 cm for annual vs 1.8 ± 1.6 cm for biennial [p = .04] and vs 1.8 ± 1.5 cm nonannual [p = .03]). Lower AJCC stage, fewer interval cancers, and smaller tumor diameter also persisted among postmenopausal women undergoing annual screening. Patients undergoing biennial and nonannual screening showed nonsignificant greater use of axillary lymph node dissection (annual, 24 of 200 [12.0%]; biennial, 6 of 32 [18.8%]; nonannual, 7 of 45 [15.6%]) and chemotherapy (annual, 55 of 200 [27.5%]; biennial, 12 of 32 [37.5%]; nonannual, 16 of 45 [35.6%]). CONCLUSION. Annual mammographic screening was associated with lower breast cancer stage and fewer interval cancers than biennial or nonannual screening.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Slab Thickness: Impact on Reader Performance and Interpretation Time.

Background Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) helps reduce recall rates and improve cancer detection compared with two-dimensional (2D) mammography but has a longer interpretation time. Purpose To evaluate the effect of DBT slab thickness and overlap on reader performance and interpretation time in the absence of 1-mm slices. Materials and Methods In this retrospective HIPAA-compliant multireader study of DBT examinations performed between August 2013 and July 2017, four fellowship-trained breast imaging radiologists blinded to final histologic findings interpreted DBT examinations by using a standard protocol (10-mm slabs with 5-mm overlap, 1-mm slices, synthetic 2D mammogram) and an experimental protocol (6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, synthetic 2D mammogram) with a crossover design. Among the 122 DBT examinations, 74 mammographic findings had final histologic findings, including 31 masses (26 malignant), 20 groups of calcifications (12 malignant), 18 architectural distortions (15 malignant), and five asymmetries (two malignant). Durations of reader interpretations were recorded. Comparisons were made by using receiver operating characteristic curves for diagnostic performance and paired t tests for continuous variables. Results Among 122 women, mean age was 58.6 years ± 10.1 (standard deviation). For detection of malignancy, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were similar between protocols (range, 0.83-0.94 vs 0.84-0.92; P ≥ .63). Mean DBT interpretation time was shorter with the experimental protocol for three of four readers (reader 1, 5.6 minutes ± 1.7 vs 4.7 minutes ± 1.4 [P < .001]; reader 2, 2.8 minutes ± 1.1 vs 2.3 minutes ± 1.0 [P = .001]; reader 3, 3.6 minutes ± 1.4 vs 3.3 minutes ± 1.3 [P = .17]; reader 4, 4.3 minutes ± 1.0 vs 3.8 minutes ± 1.1 [P ≤ .001]), with 72% reduction in both mean number of images and mean file size (P < .001 for both). Conclusion A digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction protocol that uses 6-mm slabs with 3-mm overlap, without 1-mm slices, had similar diagnostic performance compared with the standard protocol and led to a reduced interpretation time for three of four readers. © RSNA, 2020 See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.

Use of Screening Mammography to Detect Occult Malignancy in Autologous Breast Reconstructions: A 15-year Experience.

Purpose To examine how often screening mammography depicts clinically occult malignancy in breast reconstruction with autologous myocutaneous flaps (AMFs). Materials and Methods Between January 1, 2000, and July 15, 2015, the authors retrospectively identified 515 women who had undergone mammography of 618 AMFs and who had at least 1 year of clinical follow-up. Of the 618 AMFs, 485 (78.5%) were performed after mastectomy for cancer and 133 (21.5%) were performed after prophylactic mastectomy. Medical records were used to determine the frequency, histopathologic characteristics, presentation, time to recurrence, and detection modality of malignancy. Cancer detection rate (CDR), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and false-positive biopsy rate were calculated. Results An average of 6.7 screening mammograms (range, 1-16) were obtained over 15.5 years. The frequency of local-regional recurrence (LRR) was 3.9% (20 of 515 women; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2%, 5.6%); all LRRs were invasive, and none were detected in the breast mound after prophylactic mastectomy. Of the 20 women with LRR, 13 (65%) were screened annually before the diagnosis. Seven of those 13 women (54%) had clinically occult LRR, and mammography depicted five. Five of the six clinically evident recurrences (83%) were interval cancers. The median time between reconstruction and first recurrence was 4.4 years (range, 0.8-16.2 years). The CDR per AMF was 1.5 per 1000 screening mammograms (five of 3358; 95% CI: 0.18, 2.8) after mastectomy for cancer and 0 of 1000 examinations (0 of 805 mammograms; 95% CI: 0, 5) after prophylactic mastectomy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and false-positive biopsy rate were 42% (five of 12), 99.4% (4125 of 4151), 16% (five of 31), and 0.6% (26 of 4151), respectively. Conclusion The CDR of screening mammography (1.5 per 1000 screening mammograms) of the AMF after mastectomy for cancer is comparable to that for one native breast of an age-matched woman. Screening mammography adds little value after prophylactic mastectomy. © RSNA, 2018.

Harms of Restrictive Risk-Based Mammographic Breast Cancer Screening.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if restrictive risk-based mammographic screening could miss breast cancers that population-based screening could detect. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Through a retrospective search of records at a single institution, we identified 552 screen-detected breast cancers in 533 patients. All in situ and invasive breast cancers detected at screening between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2014, were included. Medical records were reviewed for history, pathology, cancer size, nodal status, breast density, and mammographic findings. Mammograms were interpreted by one of 14 breast imaging radiologists with 3-30 years of experience, all of whom were certified according to the Mammography Quality Standards Act. Patient ages ranged from 36 to 88 years (mean, 61 years). The breast cancer risks evaluated were family history of breast cancer and dense breast tissue. Positive family history was defined as a first-degree relative with breast cancer. Dense breast parenchyma was either heterogeneously or extremely dense. RESULTS: Group 1 consisted of the 76.7% (409/533) of patients who had no personal history of breast cancer. Of these patients, 75.6% (309/409) had no family history of breast cancer, and 56% (229/409) had nondense breasts. Group 2 consisted of the 16.7% (89/533) of patients who were 40-49 years old. Of these patients, 79.8% (71/89) had no family history of breast cancer, and 30.3% (27/89) had nondense breasts. Ductal carcinoma in situ made up 34.6% (191/552) of the cancers; 65.4% (361/552) were invasive. The median size of the invasive cancers was 11 mm. Of the screen-detected breast cancers, 63.8% (352/552) were minimal cancers. CONCLUSION: Many screen-detected breast cancers occurred in women without dense tissue or a family history of breast cancer. Exclusive use of restrictive risk-based screening could result in delayed cancer detection for many women.

Breast imaging after dark: patient outcomes following evaluation for breast abscess in the emergency department after hours.

In our study, we sought to report the management, clinical outcomes, and follow-up rates of patients who presented for evaluation of breast abscess in the Emergency Department (ED) after hours. A retrospective search of ultrasound reports at our institution identified all patients from January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2013 who were scanned in the ED after hours to evaluate for breast abscess. Patient demographics, clinical information, imaging findings, follow-up rates, and outcomes were reviewed. One hundred eighty-five patients were included in the study. Forty-four percent (86/185) of the patients were diagnosed with abscess based on ultrasound findings in the ED. Twenty-seven percent (23/86) were recently post-operative, and 12 % (10/86) were postpartum/breastfeeding. Mastitis was the diagnosis in the remaining 54 % (99/185). Only 1/86 cases were associated with breast cancer. Seventy-seven percent (66/86) of patients were treated with an invasive procedure; 39 % (26/66) had surgical evacuation, 30 % (20/66) image-guided drainage, 23 % (15/66) bedside or clinic incision and drainage, and 8 % (5/66) palpation-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA). Seventy-seven percent (143/185) of patients had clinical and/or imaging follow-up. Forty-four percent (63/143) had long-term follow-up (≥ 3 months). Almost 50 % of the patients who presented to the ED for evaluation of abscess were diagnosed with abscess while the remaining patients were diagnosed with mastitis. Appropriate clinical and/or imaging follow-up occurred in 77 %. Long-term follow-up (≥ 3 months) occurred more frequently in patients older than 30 years of age. Appropriate follow-up does not occur in approximately one fourth of cases, suggesting that additional clinician and patient education is warranted.

Surgical biopsy is still necessary for BI-RADS 4 calcifications found on digital mammography that are technically too faint for stereotactic core biopsy.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of faint BI-RADS 4 calcifications detected with digital mammography that were not amenable to stereotactic core biopsy due to suboptimal visualization. Following Institutional Review Board approval, a HIPAA compliant retrospective search identified 665 wire-localized surgical excisions of calcifications in 606 patients between 2007 and 2010. We included all patients that had surgical excision for initial diagnostic biopsy due to poor calcification visualization, whose current imaging was entirely digital and performed at our institution and who did not have a diagnosis of breast cancer within the prior 2 years. The final study population consisted of 20 wire-localized surgical biopsies in 19 patients performed instead of stereotactic core biopsy due to poor visibility of faint calcifications. Of the 20 biopsies, 4 (20% confidence intervals 2, 38%) were malignant, 5 (25%) showed atypia and 11 (55%) were benign. Of the malignant cases, two were invasive ductal carcinoma (2 and 1.5 mm), one was intermediate grade DCIS and one was low-grade DCIS. Malignant calcifications ranged from 3 to 12 mm. The breast density was scattered in 6/19 (32%), heterogeneously dense in 11/19 (58%) and extremely dense in 2/19 (10%). Digital mammography-detected faint calcifications that were not amenable to stereotactic biopsy due to suboptimal visualization had a risk of malignancy of 20%. While infrequent, these calcifications should continue to be considered suspicious and surgical biopsy recommended.

Outcomes of solid palpable masses assessed as BI-RADS 3 or 4A: a retrospective review.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and cancer rate in solid palpable masses with benign features assessed as BI-RADS 3 or 4A. This study was Institutional Review Board approved. Mammography and breast ultrasound reports in our Radiology Information System were searched for solid, palpable masses with benign features described from 1/1/2000 to 12/31/2009, and retrospectively reviewed. Those masses prospectively assessed as BI-RADS 3 or 4A, or suggestive of a fibroadenoma or other benign pathology were retrieved. Chart review was used to assess outcomes and cancer rate. Basic summary measures were summarized and compared between BI-RADS 3 and 4A groups using Wilcoxon Rank Sum test for continuous data or Fisher's exact test for categorical data. The cancer rate across age quartiles was assessed using Cochran-Armitage trend test. 573 solid palpable masses with benign features in 487 women were identified. There were 197 BI-RADS 3 and 376 BI-RADS 4A masses. The overall cancer rate was 1.6 % (9/573). All cancers were BI-RADS 4A (cancer rate 2.4 %-9/376). Smaller mean size and younger age at presentation in BI-RADS 3 women was found compared to BI-RADS 4A (P < 0.0001). There was a significant increase in cancer rate across age quartiles (P = 0.03124). The cancer rate is very low in solid palpable masses with benign features. In particular, BI-RADS 3 palpable masses in young women may undergo close surveillance without immediate biopsy, confirming what other investigators have found. All cancers were in the BI-RADS 4A group with increasing incidence with age, with over half occurring in women over 40 years old. Palpable masses in women 40 and older with benign features should be considered for immediate biopsy.

Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance of clustered microcalcification detection on breast phantom images acquired with an experimental system using variable scan angles, angular increments, and number of projection views.

PURPOSE: To investigate the dependence of microcalcification cluster detectability on tomographic scan angle, angular increment, and number of projection views acquired at digital breast tomosynthesis ( DBT digital breast tomosynthesis ). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prototype DBT digital breast tomosynthesis system operated in step-and-shoot mode was used to image breast phantoms. Four 5-cm-thick phantoms embedded with 81 simulated microcalcification clusters of three speck sizes (subtle, medium, and obvious) were imaged by using a rhodium target and rhodium filter with 29 kV, 50 mAs, and seven acquisition protocols. Fixed angular increments were used in four protocols (denoted as scan angle, angular increment, and number of projection views, respectively: 16°, 1°, and 17; 24°, 3°, and nine; 30°, 3°, and 11; and 60°, 3°, and 21), and variable increments were used in three (40°, variable, and 13; 40°, variable, and 15; and 60°, variable, and 21). The reconstructed DBT digital breast tomosynthesis images were interpreted by six radiologists who located the microcalcification clusters and rated their conspicuity. RESULTS: The mean sensitivity for detection of subtle clusters ranged from 80% (22.5 of 28) to 96% (26.8 of 28) for the seven DBT digital breast tomosynthesis protocols; the highest sensitivity was achieved with the 16°, 1°, and 17 protocol (96%), but the difference was significant only for the 60°, 3°, and 21 protocol (80%, P < .002) and did not reach significance for the other five protocols (P = .01-.15). The mean sensitivity for detection of medium and obvious clusters ranged from 97% (28.2 of 29) to 100% (24 of 24), but the differences fell short of significance (P = .08 to >.99). The conspicuity of subtle and medium clusters with the 16°, 1°, and 17 protocol was rated higher than those with other protocols; the differences were significant for subtle clusters with the 24°, 3°, and nine protocol and for medium clusters with 24°, 3°, and nine; 30°, 3°, and 11; 60°, 3° and 21; and 60°, variable, and 21 protocols (P < .002). CONCLUSION: With imaging that did not include x-ray source motion or patient motion during acquisition of the projection views, narrow-angle DBT digital breast tomosynthesis provided higher sensitivity and conspicuity than wide-angle DBT digital breast tomosynthesis for subtle microcalcification clusters.

Is the upgrade rate of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by core needle biopsy of calcifications different for digital and film-screen mammography?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to establish the upgrade rate of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) diagnosed by stereotactic vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy for calcifications detected by digital mammography as compared with film-screen mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective record search identified 101 cases of ADH. Criteria included women with calcifications biopsied using stereotactic vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy at our institution between January 2001 and December 2011. The center transitioned from film-screen mammography in 2001 to all digital mammography by 2010. Stereotactic vacuum-assisted core needle biopsies were performed using 11-gauge (59/101 [58%]) or 8-gauge (42/101 [42%]) needles. All pathology was interpreted by breast pathologists using standard criteria. RESULTS: Of 101 cases of ADH, 57 (56.4%) were detected using digital and 44 (43.6%) were detected using film-screen mammography. Seven of 57 (12.3%) cases of ADH detected by digital mammography were upgraded to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (n = 6) or invasive cancer (n = 1). Six of 44 (13.6%) cases of ADH detected by film-screen mammography were upgraded to DCIS (n = 5) or invasive cancer (n = 1) (p = 0.84). There was a trend toward low-grade DCIS in cases detected by digital mammography (3/7 [42.9%]) as compared with film-screen mammography (1/6 [16.7%]) (p = 0.68). A nonsignificant overall higher percentage of upgrades occurred when calcifications were not completely removed (10/52 [19.2%]) as compared with completely removed (3/47 [6.4%]). There was no difference in upgrade rate of stereotactic vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy performed using 11-gauge (7/59 [11.9%]) versus 8-gauge (6/42 [14.3%]) needles. CONCLUSION: The upgrade rate of ADH diagnosed by stereotactic vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy was not significantly different between digital and film-screen mammography. The current recommendation for excision of ADH diagnosed by stereotactic vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy should be applied to ADH detected by digital mammography.

Imaging of breast cancer-related changes after nonsurgical therapy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to review both expected and unexpected thoracic CT manifestations of nonsurgical breast cancer treatment with multimodality imaging correlation. Specific topics include the spectrum of posttherapy changes attributed to chemotherapy and radiation therapy and the spread of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Thoracic CT is an important tool commonly used for breast cancer staging and surveillance and for diagnostic indications such as shortness of breath and chest pain. Imaging findings can be related to progression of disease or to associated conditions, such as pulmonary embolism. The hallmarks of breast cancer spread in the thorax include pulmonary nodules, enlarged lymph nodes, pleural effusions, thickening or nodularity, and sclerotic or lytic skeletal lesions. Less common findings including pulmonary lymphangitic tumor spread and pericardial metastasis. The findings also may represent the sequelae of surgery, radiation therapy, or chemotherapy for breast cancer. Knowledge of various treatment methods and their expected and unexpected CT findings is important for recognizing treatment-related abnormalities to avoid confusion with breast cancer spread and thereby minimize the risk that unnecessary further diagnostic imaging will be performed.

Imaging of breast cancer-related changes after surgical therapy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to discuss the surgical treatment of breast cancer and its resultant thoracic CT and multimodality imaging manifestations. CONCLUSION: Many breast cancer patients undergo cross-sectional imaging at some point during or after treatment. Thoracic CT is an important modality performed for staging and surveillance. Thoracic CT examinations often show findings related to patients' surgical or adjuvant treatment. The postsurgical changes visible on thoracic CT may include those related to lumpectomy, mastectomy, breast reconstruction, and axillary surgery. Postsurgical complications may also be seen, including fluid collections, infection, fat necrosis, and lymphedema. Recognition and appropriate interpretation of the posttherapeutic spectrum of findings are important to avoid unnecessary diagnostic imaging and minimize patient anxiety.

Continuity of Radiologists Between Diagnostic Breast Imaging and Image-Guided Breast Biopsy: Impact on Patient-Reported Biopsy Morbidity Experiences.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether continuity of care between diagnostic breast imaging and subsequent image-guided breast biopsy could reduce patient-reported biopsy-related morbidity. METHODS: This was a prospective, pragmatically randomized, 2-arm health utilities analysis of 200 women undergoing diagnostic breast imaging followed by US- or stereotactic-guided breast biopsy at a single quaternary care center from September 3, 2019, to April 10, 2023. Breast biopsy-naive women with a BI-RADS 4 or 5 finding at diagnostic imaging were randomly scheduled for the typically first available biopsy appointment. One day after biopsy, enrolled patients were administered the Testing Morbidities Index (TMI). The primary outcome was the difference in TMI summary utility scores in patients who did vs did not have the same radiologist perform diagnostic imaging and biopsy. RESULTS: Response rates were 63% (100/159) for the different radiologist cohort and 71% (100/140) for the same radiologist cohort; all respondents answered all questions in both arms. Mean time to biopsy was 7 ± 6 days and 10 ± 9 days, and the number of participating radiologists was 11 and 18, respectively. There was no difference in individual measured domains (pain, fear, or anxiety before procedure; pain, embarrassment, fear, or anxiety during procedure; mental or physical impact after procedure; all P >.00625) or in overall patient morbidity (0.83 [95% CI, 0.81-0.85] vs 0.82 [95% CI: 0.80-0.84], P = .66). CONCLUSION: Continuity of care between diagnostic breast imaging and image-guided breast biopsy did not affect morbidity associated with breast biopsy, suggesting that patients should be scheduled for the soonest available biopsy appointment rather than waiting for the same radiologist.

Outcomes of High-Risk Breast MRI Screening in Women Without Prior History of Breast Cancer: Effectiveness Data from a Tertiary Care Center.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance outcomes of a breast MRI screening program in high-risk women without prior history of breast cancer. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 1 405 consecutive screening breast MRI examinations in 681 asymptomatic women with high risk of breast cancer without prior history of breast cancer from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2019. Outcomes (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, false-negative rate [FNR], cancer detection rate [CDR]) and characteristics of cancers were determined based on histopathology or 12-month follow-up. MRI examinations performed, BI-RADS assessments, pathology outcomes, and CDRs were analyzed overall and by age decade. Results in incidence screening round (MRI in last 18 months) and nonincidence round were compared. RESULTS: Breast MRI achieved CDR 20/1000, sensitivity 93.3% (28/30), and specificity 83.4% (1 147/1375). Twenty-eight (28/1 405, CDR 20/1000) screen-detected cancers were identified: 18 (64.3%, 18/28) invasive and 10 (35.7%, 10/28) ductal carcinoma in situ. Overall, 92.9% (26/28) of all cancers were stage 0 or 1 and 89.3% (25/28) were node negative. All 14 incidence screening round malignancies were stage 0 or 1 with N0 disease. Median size for invasive carcinoma was 8.0 mm and for ductal carcinoma in situ was 9.0 mm. There were two false-negative exams for an FNR 0.1% (2/1 405). CONCLUSION: High-risk screening breast MRI was effective at detecting early breast cancer and associated with favorable outcomes.

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.

Impact of breast mass size on accuracy of ultrasound elastography vs. conventional B-mode ultrasound: a meta-analysis of individual participants.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis comparing the diagnostic performance of ultrasound elastography (USE) versus B-mode ultrasound (USB) across size ranges of breast masses. METHODS: An extensive literature search of PubMed and other medical/general purpose databases from inception through August 2011 was conducted. Corresponding authors of published studies that reported a direct comparison of the diagnostic performance of USE using the elasticity score versus USB for characterisation of focal breast masses were contacted for their original patient-level data set. Summary diagnostic performance measures were compared for each test within and across three mass size groups (<10 mm, 10-19 mm, and >19 mm). RESULTS: The patient-level data sets were received from five studies, providing information on 1,412 breast masses. For breast masses <10 mm (n = 543; 121 malignant), the sensitivity/specificity of USE and USB were 76 %/93 % and 95 %/68 %, respectively. For masses 10-19 mm of size (n = 528; 247 malignant), sensitivity/specificity of USE and USB were 82 %/90 % and 95 %/67 %, respectively. For masses >19 mm of size (n = 325; 162 malignant), sensitivity/specificity of USE and USB were 74 %/94 % and 97 %/55 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the mass size, USE has higher specificity and lower sensitivity compared to USB in characterising breast masses. The performance of each of these two tests does not vary significantly by mass size.

Does digital mammography increase detection of high-risk breast lesions presenting as calcifications?

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate whether the transition from film-screen mammography (FSM) to digital mammography (DM) was associated with increased detection of high-risk breast lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective search identified 142 cases of atypia or lobular neoplasia (LN) diagnosed in women with mammographic calcifications between January 2004 and August 2010. We excluded lesions upgraded to cancer at excisional biopsy, lesions in women with ipsilateral cancer within 2 years of mammography, and lesions that presented as a mass only. The cases included in the cohort were 82 (57.7%) cases of atypical ductal hyperplasia; 17 (12%) atypical lobular hyperplasia; 25 (17.6%) lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS); 12 (8.5%) atypia and LCIS; and six (4.2%) other atypia. The institution transitioned from predominantly performing FSM in 2004 to performing only DM by 2010. Pathology was interpreted by breast pathologists. The annual detection rate was calculated by dividing the number of high-risk lesions by mammography volume. RESULTS: Of the 142 cases of atypia or LN, 52 (36.6%) were detected using FSM and 90 (63.4%) were detected using DM. The detection rate was higher with DM (1.24/1000 mammographic studies) than FSM (0.37/1000 mammographic studies). The detection rate by year ranged between 0.21 and 0.64 per 1000 mammographic studies for FSM and between 0.32 and 1.49 per 1000 mammographic studies for DM. The median size of the calcifications was 8 mm on DM and 7 mm on FSM. The most common appearance was clustered amorphous or indistinct calcifications on both FSM and DM. CONCLUSION: The transition from FSM to DM was associated with a threefold increase in the detection rate of high-risk lesions. Improved detection may allow enhanced screening, risk reduction treatment, and possibly breast cancer prevention. However, increased detection of high-risk lesions may also result in oversurveillance and treatment.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Palpable Breast Masses: 2022 Update.

Palpable masses in women are the most common symptom associated with breast cancer. This document reviews and evaluates the current evidence for imaging recommendations of palpable masses in women less than 30 to over 40 years of age. There is also a review of several different scenarios and recommendations after initial imaging. Ultrasound is usually the appropriate initial imaging for women under 30 years of age. If ultrasound findings are suspicious or highly suggestive of malignancy (BIRADS 4 or 5), it is usually appropriate to continue with diagnostic tomosynthesis or mammography with image-guided biopsy. No further imaging is recommended if the ultrasound is benign or negative. The patient under 30 years of age with a probably benign ultrasound may undergo further imaging; however, the clinical scenario plays a role in the decision to biopsy. For women between 30 to 39 years of age, ultrasound, diagnostic mammography, tomosynthesis, and ultrasound are usually appropriate. Diagnostic mammography and tomosynthesis are the appropriate initial imaging for women 40 years of age or older, as ultrasound may be appropriate if the patient had a negative mammogram within 6 months of presentation or immediately after mammography findings are suspicious or highly suggestive of malignancy. If the diagnostic mammogram, tomosynthesis, and ultrasound findings are probably benign, no further imaging is necessary unless the clinical scenario indicates a biopsy. 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.

Accuracy of quantitative ultrasound elastography for differentiation of malignant and benign breast abnormalities: a meta-analysis.

The purpose of this study was to systematically review recent literature on diagnostic performance of strain ratio and length ratio, two different strain measurements in ultrasound elastography, for differentiating benign and malignant breast masses. A literature search of PubMed and other medical and general purpose databases from inception through January 2012 was conducted. Published studies that evaluated the diagnostic performance of ultrasound elastography alone reporting either strain ratio or length ratio for characterization of focal breast lesions and using cytology (fine needle aspiration) or histology (core biopsy) as a reference standard were included. Summary diagnostic performance measures were assessed using bivariate generalized linear mixed modeling. Nine studies reported strain ratio for 2,087 breast masses (667 cancers, 1,420 benign lesions). Summary sensitivity and specificity were 88 % (95 % Credible Interval (CrI), 84-91 %), and 83 % (95 % CrI, 78-88 %), respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR) were 5.57 (95 % CrI, 3.85-8.01) and 0.14 (95 % CrI, 0.09-0.20), respectively. The inconsistency index for heterogeneity was 6 % (95 % CrI, 1-22 %) for sensitivity and 8 % (95 % CrI, 3-24 %) for specificity. Analysis of three studies reporting length ratio for 450 breast masses demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 98 % (95 % CrI, 93-99 %) and 72 % (95 % CrI, 31-96 %), respectively. Strain ratio and length ratio have good diagnostic performance for distinguishing benign from malignant breast masses. Although, this performance may not be incrementally superior to that of breast imaging reporting and data system (BIRADS) in B-mode ultrasound, the application of USE using strain ratio or length ratio in combination with USB may have the potential to benefit the patients, and this requires further comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analyses.