[Clinical practice guidelines: Benign breast tumor--Aims, methods and organization]. / Recommandations pour la pratique clinique: tumeurs bénignes du sein--Objectifs, méthodes et organisation.

Conversely to breast cancer, few data and guidelines are available to explore and manage benign breast disorders. Therefore, the Collège national des gynécologues et obstétriciens français (CNGOF - French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians) decided to establish clinical practice guidelines for benign breast tumour (BBT). CNGOF appointed a committee with responsibility for selecting experts, compiling questions and summarizing the recommendations. The summary of valid scientific data for each question analyzed by the experts included a level of evidence, based on the quality of the data available and defined accordingly rating scheme developed by the Haute Autorité de santé (French National Authority for Health).

[Explorations of breast microcalcifications: Guidelines]. / Exploration des microcalcifications mammaires: recommandations.

OBJECTIVES: To assess imaging performances for the detection, characterization and biopsy of breast microcalcifications and make recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: French and English publications were searched using PubMed, Cochrane Library and international learned societies recommendations. RESULTS: Digital mammography (DR [Direct Radiography] and CR [Computed Radiography]) and screen-film mammography demonstrate good performances for the detection and the characterization of breast microcalcifications. Systematic use of the 2013 edition of the BI-RADS lexicon is recommended for description and characterization of microcalcifications. Faced with BI-RADS 4 or 5 microcalcifications, breast ultrasound is recommended but a normal result does not eliminate the diagnosis of cancer and other examination should be performed. Literature review does not allow recommending digital breast tomosynthesis, elastography or MRI to analyze microcalcifications. In case of probably benign microcalcifications (BI-RADS 3), six months, one year and at least two years follow-up are recommended. In case a biopsy is indicated, it is recommended to use a vacuum-assisted macrobiopsy system with 11-gauges needles or bigger. If no calcification is visible on the radiography of the specimen, it is recommended to obtain additional samples.

[Breast imaging of mass, architectural distortion and asymmetry: Clinical practice guidelines]. / Imagerie mammaire du syndrome de masse, distorsion architecturale et asymétrie: recommandations pour la pratique clinique.

The development of the mammary imaging (mammography, ultrasound, MRI) enables the discovery of more and more lesions. The BI-RADS lexicon is the reference book for their descriptive analysis. Four elementary images must be individualized: masses and architectural distortion described in 3 imaging techniques, asymmetries and microcalcifications described in mammography. The aim of this work was to review three of these images: mass, architectural distortion and asymmetry, allowing the various actors involved in senology to propose an up-to-date diagnostic and interventional strategy, based on their positive predictive values (PPV) or negative predictive values of cancer and allowing the classification BI-RADS of the lesion. The masses are the most often encountered lesions as well in screening as in diagnosis. Their PPV is superior in diagnosis than in screening and it increases with the age. Their irregular forms, their spiculated outlines and their evolutionary character are the most relevant elements of suspicion. The architectural distortion is the rarest image and always classified suspect BI-RADS 4, except in case of a known scar. The asymmetry is less common; its PPV is low and rises only in case of evolutionary asymmetry.

[Benign breast tumors: Recommendations of Collège National des Gynécologues Obstétriciens Français (CNGOF)--Short text]. / Tumeurs bénignes du sein: recommandations pour la pratique clinique du Collège national des gynécologues et obstétriciens français (CNGOF)--Texte court.

Breast sonography is required with mammogram to explore clinical breast mass (grade B), colored unipore breast nipple discharge (grade C), or mastitis (grade C). Bi-RADS system is recommended to describe and classify breast-imaging abnormalities. For breast abscess, a percutaneous biopsy is recommended in case of mass or persistent symptoms (grade C). For mastodynia, when breast imaging is normal, no MRI neither breast biopsy is recommended (grade C). Percutaneous biopsy is recommended for BI-RADS 4-5 mass (grade B). For persistent erythematous breast nipple or atypical eczema lesion, a nipple biopsy is recommended (grade C). For distortion and asymmetry, a vacuum core needle biopsy is recommended because of the risk of underestimation by simple core needle biopsy (grade C). For BI-RADS 4-5 microcalcifications without ultrasound signal, a vacuum core needle biopsy of at least 11 gauges is recommended (grade B); in the absence of microcalcifications on radiograph carrots, additional samples are recommended (grade B). For atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ, flat epithelial with atypia, radial scar, mucocele with atypia, surgical excision is commonly recommended (grade C). Expectant management is feasible after multidisciplinary concertation. For these lesions, when excision is not in sano, no new excision is recommended except for pleomorphic or with necrosis CLIS (grade C). For grade 1 phyllode tumour, in sano surgical resection is recommended; for grade 2 phyllode, 10-mm margins are recommended (grade C). For breast papillary without atypia, complete disappearance of the radiologic signal is recommended (grade C). For breast papillary with atypia, complete surgical excision is recommended (grade C).

[Management of breast nipple discharge: Recommendations]. / Exploration d'un écoulement mamelonnaire du sein uni- ou bilatéral: recommandations.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate diagnostic value of imaging procedures and management strategies of the patients with nipple discharge (ND) to establish management recommendations. METHODS: Bibliographical search in French and English languages by consultation of PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases. RESULTS: Although, all ND require an systematic evaluation guided by clinical data, bloody ND could be a predictor of breast cancer risk among different colors of discharge particularly in patients of more than 50 years (LE2). The mammography and breast ultrasography are the imaging procedures to realize in first intention (grade C) but they turn out useful only when they detect radiological abnormalities (LE4). Galactography has only a localizing value of possible ductal abnormalities (when standard imaging procedures is not contributive) (LE4). Thus, in the diagnostic investigation of a suspicious ND, galactography it is not recommended in standard practice (grade C). The breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is recommended when breast standard imaging procedures are not contributive (grade C). The ND cytology is useful only if it is positive (i.e. reveal cancer cells). There is no proof on the diagnostic performance of the cytological analysis of the ND to allow a recommendation on its realization or not. In front of a suspicious ND, when breast-imaging procedures reveals an associated radiological lesion, an adapted percutaneous biopsy is recommended by percutaneous way (grade C). Vacuum-assisted breast biopsies is a diagnostic tool but can also be therapeutic allowing to avoid surgery in case of benign lesion but current literature data do not allow recommendations on the therapeutic aspect of vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (LE4). In the absence of associated radiological signal, and in case of reproducible bloody persistent ND, a pyramidectomy is recommended (grade C).

[Delays in treatment of breast cancer: experience of an expert center of the Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP)]. / Délais au traitement du cancer du sein : expérience d'un centre expert (CEX) de l'Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP).

OBJECTIVES: The National Institute of the Cancer (INCA) recently published a study over the deadlines of medical care of breast cancers. We compared our delay within the framework of our expert center with their results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Our work is a retrospective unicentric non-interventional study. We included all the patients taken care for a breast cancer to the hospital Tenon in Paris. The criteria of inclusion were a primitive breast cancer, having accepted a care for a first cancer operated over a period of three months. We recovered 9 key deadlines to study the care of our patients. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were included. The mean age was of 55.6 years. The deadline of access to the hospital Tenon was 8.7 ± 7.7 days for the meetings of gynecology and 4.3 ± 4 days for those of radiology. The deadline of access to the diagnosis was 31.8 ± 26 days. The deadlines of access to the meeting of multidisciplinary dialogue pre-therapeutic was 13 ± 11 days. The access to the first management time was 18.5 days for the neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 13.5 days for surgery. The deadline of access to the postoperative therapeutic proposal was on average 20 ± 8 days. The deadline of access to the postoperative radiotherapy was of 197 days in case of postoperative chemotherapy vs 47.5 days without chemotherapy. The global deadline mammography-radiotherapy was of 188 days. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The deadline of access to the diagnosis, to the postoperative therapeutic proposal and the global deadline mammography-radiotherapy with adjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant were longer in our center compared with the results of the INCA. The deadlines of access to the surgery and access to the radiotherapy without postoperative chemotherapy were shorter on the other hand. The contribution of the diagnosis in one day for breast cancer is probably going to allow us to improve the deadlines of care in our structure.

Standardized diagnosis and reporting of breast cancer.

Standardized terminology developed by the American College of Radiography (ACR) through the Breast-Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon is used worldwide to describe the findings of the various breast-imaging techniques (mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)). A 7-level positive predictive value (PPV) of malignancy classification system (from BI-RADS category 0 to category 6) has been based on this terminology, giving imaging a central role in the diagnostic strategy. This document presents the standardized, compulsory BI-RADS terminology used in breast-imaging reports in 2013 in view of the new edition that will be published at the end of the year.

Radiopathological correlations: masses, non-masslike enhancements and MRI-guided biopsy.

MRI-guided biopsy is a recent interventional breast technique. Validating the procedure poses a new problem because the signal targeted is created by the injection of a paramagnetic contrast agent and is thus transitory. In the first instance, the procedure is validated by the radiologist, who checks that targeting is accurate and inserts a clip at the end of the procedure, and secondly by analysis of the histopathological results, which should be representative of the lesion. The pathologist needs to know the nature of the image, i.e. whether it is of mass or non-masslike enhancement, and its BI-RADS classification. The objective is that the image and the pathological result should concur. If the result is non-specific and benign, a follow-up MRI is required six months later.

How to measure breast cancer tumoral size at MR imaging?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of different MR sequences to measure tumor size. METHODS: Eighty-six women (mean age: 53 years (30-78)) who underwent preoperative MRI for breast cancer were included. Maximal diameters of the index tumor (IT) and of the whole extent of the tumor (WET) were measured on T2-weighted (T2W) sequences, on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) T1-weighted (T1W) sequences and on Maximal Intensity Projection (MIP) reconstructions. Agreements with pathological size were evaluated using concordance correlation coefficient (k). RESULTS: Median pathological size of IT was 20mm (13-25 mm, interquartile range). Median pathological size of the WET was 29 mm (16-50mm, interquartile range). Measurement of IT showed a good concordance with pathological size, with best results using T2W (k = 0.690) compared to MIP (k = 0.667), early-subtracted DCE frame (k = 0.630) and early-native DCE frame (k = 0.588). IT was visible on T2W in 83.7% and accurately measured within 5mm in 69.9%. Measurement of WET was superior using early-subtracted DCE frame (k = 0.642) compared to late-native frame (k = 0.635), early-native frame (k = 0.631), late-subtracted frame (k = 0.620) and MIP (k = 0.565). However, even using early-subtracted frame, WET was accurately measured within 5mm only 39.3%. CONCLUSION: If visible, IT size is best measured on T2W with a good accuracy (69%) whereas WET is best estimated on early-subtracted DCE frame. However, when adjacent additional sites exist around IT, suspected surrounding disease components need to be proved by pathological analysis.

[Are decisions of multidisciplinary tumor boards in accordance with the guidelines? Experience of an university reference center for breast cancer]. / Les décisions des RCP sont-elles conformes au référentiel utilisé ? Expérience d'un centre de référence universitaire pour le cancer du sein.

OBJECTIVE: Multidisciplinary meeting (MDM) should ensure a homogeneous management of the patients by following breast cancer guidelines. Are these guidelines really applied in MDM decisions? PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the last 200 cases of patients operated in our department for breast cancer. We searched for each case if MDM had been consulted, at which step of the management and if the decision was in accordance with our guidelines. RESULTS: Mean age of the 200 patients was 56 (range 27-87)years old and 145 of them (72,5%) had an invasive breast cancer. All cases were presented to the MDM, 148 (74%) preoperatively and 200 (100%) postoperatively. Only four decisions did not follow our guidelines. In three cases, the decision was explained within the MDM report and in one case, the decision was not explained but could be understood. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: We found a significant relation between MDM decisions and our guidelines. However, complex cases require adapting the guidelines to the particularity and the wishes of the patients.

Current opinion on clip placement after breast biopsy: a survey of practising radiologists in France and Quebec.

AIM: To investigate current practice regarding clip placement after breast biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In June 2011, an online survey instrument was designed using an Internet-based survey site (www.surveymonkey.com) to assess practices and opinions of breast radiologists regarding clip placement after breast biopsy. Radiologists were asked to give personal practice data, describe their current practice regarding clip deployment under stereotactic, ultrasonographic, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) guidance, and describe what steps are taken to ensure quality control with regards to clip deployment. RESULTS: The response rate was 29.9% in France (131 respondents) and 46.7% in Quebec (50 respondents). The great majority of respondents used breast markers in their practice (92.1% in France and 96% in Quebec). In both countries, most reported deploying a clip after percutaneous biopsy under stereotactic or MRI guidance. Regarding clip deployment under ultrasonography, 38% of Quebec radiologists systematically placed a marker after each biopsy, whereas 30% of French radiologists never placed a marker in this situation, mainly due to its cost. Finally, 56.4% of radiologists in France and 54% in Quebec considered that their practice regarding clip deployment after breast percutaneous biopsy had changed in the last 5 years. CONCLUSION: There continues to be variations in the use of biopsy clips after imaging-guided biopsies, particularly with regards to sonographic techniques. These variations are likely to decrease over time, with the standardization of relatively new investigation protocols.

Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the breast: advantages and pitfalls.

The aim of this paper is to review all clinical applications of diffusion weighted MR imaging (DWI) for breast pathology. The challenge of DWI is to obtain the best compromise between lesion detection and characterization. Technical factors affecting lesion characterization and detection are detailed including the effect of contrast administration, the choice of number of b and of b(max), the variation of diagnostic performance according to the type and the size of lesion studied.

Tips and techniques in breast MRI.

The standard breast MRI protocol includes T2 sequences (anatomy and signal analysis), T1 gradient-echo sequences which can detect markers placed after biopsy, and injected dynamic 3D sequences for performing volume and multiplanar reconstructions, which are particularly useful for locating lesions well. Good patient positioning is essential and is obtained by using foam wedges for small breasts, ensuring there are no folds, and the correct position of the nipples. These aspects limit movement artefacts which alter subtraction sequences, so that it must always be possible for reading these sequences to be assisted by comparing them with the native sequences. New functional imaging sequences are now appearing in an attempt to increase the specificity of MRI, which is one of its main limitations. Of these, magnetic resonance spectroscopy appears to be the most promising, highlighting an abnormal choline peak in malignant lesions. This molecular signature provides early information (24 hours after beginning neoadjuvant treatment) on the chemosensitivity of a breast tumour.

Predictive factors for breast cancer in patients diagnosed with ductal intraepithelial neoplasia, grade 1B.

BACKGROUND: For ductal intraepithelial neoplasia, grade 1B, studies that predict breast cancer risk after an 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy have yielded contradictory results. In order to identify a predictive model of breast cancer risk, we assessed the underestimation rate according to radiological and clinical findings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Our study involved 212 patients. We compared the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves and the clinical utility of a logistic regression and partitioning model. RESULTS: Overall upgrade to malignancy occurred in 42 (19.8%) out of the 212 cases. The area under the curve for the logistic regression and partitioning model were 0.65 (95% confidence interval=0.61-0.70) and 0.58 (95% confidence interval=0.54-0.62), respectively. The lowest predicted underestimation rate obtained with the logistic regression model was 9.5%. CONCLUSION: From this large series, we were unable to define any accurate safety model for breast cancer. Surgery should be thus recommended.

Scoring to predict the possibility of upgrades to malignancy in atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by an 11-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy device: an external validation study.

BACKGROUND: Ko's scoring system was developed to predict malignancy upgrades in patients diagnosed with atypical ductal hyperplasia by core needle biopsy. The Ko algorithm was able to identify a subset of patients who were eligible for exclusively clinical follow-up. The current study statistically investigated the patient outcomes to determine whether this scoring system could be translated and used safely in clinical practice. METHODS: We tested the statistical performance of the Ko scoring system against an external independent multicentre population. One hundred and seven cases of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by an 11-gauge biopsy needle were available for inclusion in this study. The discrimination, calibration and clinical utility of the scoring system were quantified. In addition, we tested the underestimation rate, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values according to the score threshold. RESULTS: The overall underestimation rate was 19% (20/107). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the logistic regression model was 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.47-0.53). The model was not well calibrated. The lowest predicted underestimation rate was 11%. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values were 90%, 22%, 20%, and 89%, respectively, according to the most accurate threshold proposed in the original study. CONCLUSION: The scoring system was not sufficiently accurate to safely define a subset of patients who would be eligible for follow-up only and no additional treatment. These results demonstrate a lack of reproducibility in an external population. A multidisciplinary approach that correlates clinicopathological and mammographic features should be recommended for the management of these patients.

[Breast MRI: Artefacts and pitfalls]. / Artefacts et pièges en IRM mammaire.

Multiple artefacts and pitfalls may occur with breast MRI. Artefacts are secondary to the MR technique itself while pitfalls often are the result of human error. The most common artefacts include motion, pulsation, chemical shift and magnetic susceptibility. The most common pitfalls include improper contrast injection, poor patient positioning, improper placement of the ROI and improper characterization of physiological and iatrogenic contrast enhancement. The identification of these artefacts and pitfalls on breast MR images may reduce their impact or even eliminate them. The use of optimized protocols is necessary. It is important to explain to patients the sequence of the examination, ensure proper placement of the breasts in the coil and optimize the contrast injection. The ROI should always be placed over the most suspicious region of the lesion. Finally, it is recommended to perform the MRI during the second week of the menstrual cycle and to discontinue the use of HRT 2 months prior to scanning when possible.

[Modalities for the functionning of a Care Center for women at high risk for breast and ovarian cancers: The French experience of Tenon Hospital]. / Modalités de fonctionnement d'un centre de suivi des femmes à haut risque de cancer du sein et de l'ovaire : une expérience à l'hôpital Tenon.

High risk may be defined as either an absolute risk greater than 20 % or a relative risk greater than 4. Concerning breast and ovarian cancer, high risk patients include carriers of a constitutive deleterious mutation of BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, patients with a significant family history of breast or ovarian cancer, and patients who have been diagnosed a benign breast lesion with a high risk of degeneration, i.e. atypical hyperplasia. Following up such patients relies on specific strategies. A center including a large panel of physicians involved in the various modalities for patients' management (geneticians, radiologists, gynecologists, plastic surgeons, pathologists, endocrinologists, psychologists, medical oncologists) has been created at Tenon Hospital with this purpose. The collaboration of these different specialists with the referent physician of the patient allows for the definition and the implementation of a patient-centered follow-up continuously updated to take into account the different periods of a woman's life, according to best practices recommendations and the evolving state-of-the art.

Histology after lumpectomy in women with epithelial atypia on stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Large-core needle biopsy of the breast (LCNB) and vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) are widely used as alternatives to open surgical biopsy (OSB) for initial diagnosis of mammographic abnormalities. Between 18% and 80% of cases in which such specimens show atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) or atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) are found to be malignant at surgery. DESIGN: From 1999 to 2005, 68 women with mammographic abnormalities were sampled by stereotactic VABB and presented atypical epithelial hyperplasia. Immunohistochemical staining with anti-cytokeratin 5/6 and anti-E-cadherin antibodies was performed. All women underwent a lumpectomy. Clinical, radiological or histological factors predictive of the risk of finding malignancy at surgery were sought. RESULTS: VABB initially showed 28 cases of ADH, 32 cases of ALH, one case of flat epithelial atypia, five cases of mixed atypia, and two cases of Lobular Carcinoma In Situ (LCIS). After slide review with immunohistochemical staining, two cases of ADH were reclassified as simple hyperplasia and two cases of ALH were reclassified as mixed atypia. Seven lesions (10.3%) that appeared to be benign on VABB were found to be malignant on OSB (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) in six cases and invasive ductal carcinoma in one case). ADH was the only predictive factor of malignancy on OSB (p=0.04 versus ALH). CONCLUSION: ADH diagnosed by vacuum-assisted breast biopsy frequently corresponds to cancer on open surgical biopsy. Surgical excision of all breast lesions containing atypical hyperplasia on percutaneous biopsy can be recommended.

[Non-masslike enhancement on breast MRI: interpretation pearls]. / Le rehaussement sans masse en IRM mammaire: comment j'interprète?

The MR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) lexicon of the American College of Radiology (ACR) includes a new lesion category defined as non-masslike enhancement. The purpose of this paper is to review the definition of this new entity, illustrate the main imaging features described in the BI-RADS lexicon and to propose a diagnostic approach based on data from the literature in order to achieve diagnosis and optimal patient management.