Preoperative breast MRI-examination for all patients with histologically proven breast cancer? A concept for a prospective multicenter trial.

Background A published retrospective data of our study group demonstrated that premenopausal women, patients with lobular invasive breast cancer or patients with high breast density [American College of Radiology (ACR) classification 3+4] significantly benefit from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) leading to additional detection of malignant foci of 20.2% in the index and 2.5% in the contralateral breast, which would otherwise not be detected by routine imaging. Critics of preoperative MRI focus on higher false-positive rates leading to unnecessary surgical procedures and mastectomies. Therefore, MRI in preoperative imaging remains controversial. Methods To validate our retrospective data we initiate a prospective one-armed multicenter trial for patients with histologically confirmed breast cancer performing routine imaging by ultrasound and mammography followed by MRI imaging based on menopause status, histologic subtype, ACR and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS)-classification. Primary endpoint is the rate of additional findings and change of treatment strategy, secondary endpoints are local recurrence-free, distant recurrence-free and overall survival. Additional MRI findings are calculated to be above 10% with a number of 100 patients recruited and a power of 80%. Conclusion MRI is detecting more tumor foci than conventional imaging but remains controversial in primary breast cancer for preoperative imaging because of the fear of over-diagnosis and the increased morbidity of additional potentially unnecessary surgical procedures. This planned one-armed prospective multicenter trial is designed to confirm our retrospectively revealed data defining subgroups with significant benefit of preoperative MRI to come to a consensus avoiding over-diagnosis and false-positive results leading to clinically beneficial and cost-effective use of preoperative MRI.

Supplemental Breast MR Imaging Screening of Women with Average Risk of Breast Cancer.

Purpose To investigate the utility and accuracy of breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging as a supplemental screening tool in women at average risk for breast cancer and to investigate the types of cancer detected with MR imaging screening. Materials and Methods This prospective observational study was conducted at two academic breast centers in women aged 40-70 years without breast cancer-associated risk factors (lifetime risk <15%). Between January 2005 and December 2013, women with at least minimal residual breast tissue (American College of Radiology categories A-D) and normal conventional imaging findings (screening mammography with or without screening ultrasonography [US]) were invited to undergo supplemental MR imaging screening. Outcome measures were supplemental cancer detection rates, interval cancer rates, and biologic profiles of MR imaging-detected additional cancers, as well as specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of MR imaging screening. Tissue diagnoses or 2 years of follow-up were used to establish the reference standard. Results A total of 2120 women were recruited and underwent 3861 screening MR imaging studies, covering an observation period of 7007 women-years. Breast MR imaging depicted 60 additional breast cancers (ductal carcinoma in situ, n = 20; invasive carcinoma, n = 40) for an overall supplemental cancer detection rate of 15.5 per 1000 cases (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.9, 20.0). Forty-eight additional cancers were detected with MR imaging at initial screening (supplemental cancer detection rate, 22.6 per 1000 cases). During the 1741 subsequent screening rounds, 12 of 13 incident cancers were found with MR imaging alone (supplemental cancer detection rate, 6.9 per 1000 cases). One cancer was diagnosed with all three methods (mammography, US, and MR imaging), and none were diagnosed with mammography only or US only. Cancers diagnosed with MR imaging were small (median, 8 mm), node negative in 93.4% of cases, and dedifferentiated (high-grade cancer) in 41.7% of cases at prevalence screening and 46.0% of cases at incidence screening. No interval cancers were observed. MR imaging screening offered high specificity (97.1%; 95% CI: 96.5, 97.6) and high PPV (35.7%; 95% CI: 28.9, 43.1). Conclusion In women at average risk for breast cancer, MR imaging screening improves early diagnosis of prognostically relevant breast cancer. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Individual management of cervical cancer in pregnancy.

PURPOSE: The management of cervical cancer in pregnancy persists to be challenging. Therefore, identification of factors that influence the choice of therapeutic management is pivotal for an adequate patient counseling. METHODS: We present a literature review of 26 studies reporting 121 pregnancies affected by cervical cancer. Additionally, we add a retrospective case series of five patients with pregnancy-associated cervical cancer diagnosed and treated in our clinic between 2006 and 2013. RESULTS: The literature review revealed that the therapeutic management during pregnancy varies according to the gestational age at diagnosis, while in the postpartum period no influence on the treatment choice could be detected. Also in our case series the choice of oncologic therapy was influenced by the gestational age, the wish to continue the pregnancy and the risks of delaying definitive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There are no standardized procedures concerning the treatment of cervical cancer in pregnancy. Therefore, in consultation with the patient and a multidisciplinary team, an adequate individualized treatment plan should be determined.

Surgical Strategies in the Treatment of Gynecomastia Grade I-II: The Combination of Liposuction and Subcutaneous Mastectomy Provides Excellent Patient Outcome and Satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: Gynecomastia (GM) is a benign condition with glandular tissue enlargement of the male breast. GM is classified into 4 grades of increasing severity. We describe a series of GM grade I-II, diagnosed, treated surgically and analyzed regarding feasibility, complication rate, and satisfaction. METHODS: From 2005 to 2012, a chart review was performed for 53 patients. Preoperative examination included endocrine and urological examination and exclusion of other pathological conditions. The surgical technique consisted of liposuction through an inframammarian-fold incision and excision of the glandular tissue by a minimal periareolar approach. RESULTS: A total number of 53 male patients with 104 breasts were available for analysis. By liposuction, a median of 300 ml (range: 10-1000 ml) was aspirated from each breast and 25.1 g (range: 3-233 g) gland tissue was resected. Surgery lasted between 25 and 164 min per patient (median: 72 min). 2 postoperative hemorrhages occurred (n = 2, 3.8%). 2 patients underwent re-operation due to cosmetic reasons (n = 2, 3.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that treatment of GM grade I-II can easily be performed by liposuction combined with subcutaneous resection of the glandular tissue as a minimally invasive and low-impact surgical treatment with a low rate of complications and excellent patient satisfaction. Preoperative workup is important to rule out specific diseases or malignancy causing the GM.

Who may benefit from preoperative breast MRI? A single-center analysis of 1102 consecutive patients with primary breast cancer.

Several authors question the potential benefit of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) against the background of possible overdiagnosis, false-positive findings, and unnecessary resections in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. In order to reveal a better selection of patients who should undergo preoperative MRI after histological confirmed breast cancer, the present analysis was implemented. We aimed to evaluate the influence of preoperative breast MRI in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer to find subgroups of patients that are most likely to benefit from preoperative MRI by the detection of occult malignant foci. A total of 1102 consecutive patients who underwent treatment for primary breast cancer between 2002 and 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent triple assessment by breast ultrasound, mammography, and bilateral breast MRI. MRI findings not seen on conventional imaging that suggested additional malignant disease was found in 344 cases (31.2 %). Histological confirmed malignant foci were found in 223 patients (20.2 %) within the index breast and in 28 patients (2.5 %) in the contralateral breast. The rate of false-negative biopsies was 31 (2.8 %) and 62 (5.6 %), respectively. Premenopausal women (p = 0.024), lobular invasive breast cancer (p = 0.02) as well as patients with high breast density [American College of Radiology (ACR) 3 + 4; p = 0.01] were significantly associated with additional malignant foci in the index breast. Multivariate analysis confirmed lobular histology (p = 0.041) as well as the co-factors "premenopausal stage" and "high breast density (ACR 3+4)" (p = 0.044) to be independently significant. Previous studies revealed that breast MRI is a reliable tool for predicting tumor extension as well as for the detection of additional ipsilateral and contralateral tumor foci in histological confirmed breast cancer. In the present study, we demonstrate that especially premenopausal patients with high breast density as well as patients with lobular histology seem to profit from preoperative MRI.

Staging of primary breast cancer is not indicated in asymptomatic patients with early tumor stages.

BACKGROUND: The routinely practiced staging for distant metastasis in patients with primary breast cancer has been increasingly questioned. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 742 patients with breast cancer who had completed staging (chest x-ray, liver ultrasound, and bone scan) were retrospectively analyzed. Present findings were transferred to a dataset of a voluntarily monitored benchmarking project by the West German Breast Center that included patient data of 179 breast cancer centers. RESULTS: Routine staging examinations revealed in 1.2% (n = 9) distant metastasis and in 38.8% (n = 288) suspicious results. In total, 15 patients (2%) had distant metastases confirmed by additional diagnostics. The existence of distant metastases correlated with tumor size, nodal state, and lymphatic vessel spread. Tumor size and nodal state were independent predictors for disseminated disease. The risk of exhibiting distant metastases was 0.77% for patients with tumor stage pT1 pN1. Based on these findings, in 159,310 patients 41,728 chest x-rays, 43,950 liver ultrasounds, and 39,037 bone scans could have been avoided. CONCLUSION: Asymptomatic patients with tumor stages ≤ pT1 pN1 do not benefit from staging of primary breast cancer. Suspending staging examinations for these patients could reduce cost without restricting oncologic safety.

Preoperative MRI in patients with locoregional recurrent breast cancer: influence on treatment modalities.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on management in patients with locoregional recurrent breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-three patients who underwent treatment for locoregional relapse of breast cancer from 2008 through 2012 were analyzed. All patients underwent both conventional surveillance by mammography, ultrasound, and clinical examination and subsequent bilateral breast MRI. RESULTS: Preoperative MRI detected additional tumor foci in 15 of 43 patients (34.9%). In two cases (4.7%), the diagnosis of occult sites had no influence on the subsequent treatment. Two patients (4.7%) had an unfavorable change of surgical management with unnecessary additional resection of benign foci. Eleven patients benefited from the MRI scan detecting malignant occult lesions (25.6%) resulting in either additional surgical resection or radiotherapy. Patient and tumor characteristics in primary disease did not differ significantly between patients with a favorable impact on surgical management and patients who experienced either no benefit or even disadvantage from MRI scan. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative breast MRI has a strong impact on the management of locoregional recurrent breast cancer. This study demonstrates that breast MRI is a powerful supplement to conventional diagnostic work-up, both during follow-up or preoperative treatment planning in recurrent disease.

Potential impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging of the breast on patient selection for accelerated partial breast irradiation.

PURPOSE: Accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) after breast-conserving therapy is currently under investigation in prospective randomized studies. Multifocality and multicentricity are exclusion criteria for APBI. Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can detect ipsilateral and contralateral invasive tumor foci or ductal carcinoma in situ in addition to conventional diagnostic methods (clinical examination, mammography, and ultrasonography). The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the impact of preoperative MRI on patient selection for APBI. METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2002 to 2007, a total of 579 consecutive, nonselected patients with newly diagnosed early-stage breast cancer received preoperative breast MRI in addition to conventional imaging studies at the Bonn University Breast Cancer Center. In retrospect, 113 patients would have met the criteria for APBI using conventional imaging workup (clinical tumor size ≤3 cm; negative axillary lymph node status; unifocal disease; no evidence of distant metastases; no invasive lobular carcinoma, ductal and lobular carcinoma in situ, or Paget's disease). We analyzed the amount of additional ipsilateral and contralateral tumor foci detected by MRI. RESULTS: MRI detected additional tumor foci in 8.8% of patients eligible for APBI (11 tumor foci in 10 of 113 patients), either ipsilateral (n = 7, 6.2%) or contralateral (n = 4, 3.5%). In 1 patient, MRI helped detect additional tumor focus both ipsilaterally and contralaterally. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative breast MRI is able to identify additional tumor foci in a clinically relevant number of cases in this highly selected group of patients with low-risk disease and may be useful in selecting patients for APBI.

Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial.

PURPOSE: We investigated the respective contribution (in terms of cancer yield and stage at diagnosis) of clinical breast examination (CBE), mammography, ultrasound, and quality-assured breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), used alone or in different combination, for screening women at elevated risk for breast cancer. METHODS: Prospective multicenter observational cohort study. Six hundred eighty-seven asymptomatic women at elevated familial risk (> or = 20% lifetime) underwent 1,679 annual screening rounds consisting of CBE, mammography, ultrasound, and MRI, read independently and in different combinations. In a subgroup of 371 women, additional half-yearly ultrasound and CBE was performed more than 869 screening rounds. Mean and median follow-up was 29.18 and 29.09 months. RESULTS: Twenty-seven women were diagnosed with breast cancer: 11 ductal carcinoma in situ (41%) and 16 invasive cancers (59%). Three (11%) of 27 were node positive. All cancers were detected during annual screening; no interval cancer occurred; no cancer was identified during half-yearly ultrasound. The cancer yield of ultrasound (6.0 of 1,000) and mammography (5.4 of 1,000) was equivalent; it increased nonsignificantly (7.7 of 1,000) if both methods were combined. Cancer yield achieved by MRI alone (14.9 of 1,000) was significantly higher; it was not significantly improved by adding mammography (MRI plus mammography: 16.0 of 1,000) and did not change by adding ultrasound (MRI plus ultrasound: 14.9 of 1,000). Positive predictive value was 39% for mammography, 36% for ultrasound, and 48% for MRI. CONCLUSION: In women at elevated familial risk, quality-assured MRI screening shifts the distribution of screen-detected breast cancers toward the preinvasive stage. In women undergoing quality-assured MRI annually, neither mammography, nor annual or half-yearly ultrasound or CBE will add to the cancer yield achieved by MRI alone.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with carboplatin and docetaxel in advanced ovarian cancer--a prospective multicenter phase II trial (PRIMOVAR).

Early response criteria and surgical outcome were evaluated in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with FIGO stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer and an ascites volume of >or=500 ml were randomly assigned to receive preoperatively 3 (A1) or 2 (A2) of 6 cycles of carboplatin and docetaxel intravenously. Response was monitored by measuring target lesions, ascites volumes and serum CA 125 levels. The primary outcome measure was the preoperative reduction of ascites volume. Secondary outcome measures were the evaluation of residual tumor and perioperative morbidity and mortality. Eighty-three patients underwent cytoreductive surgery, 40 after 3 cycles and 43 patients after 2 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. 'Optimal debulking' (or=500 ml. A decrease of the CA 125 level from baseline of less than 50% was observed in 7 (A1) and 9 patients (A2). Computed tomography scan results showed progressive disease in 6 patients (3 A1; 3 A2). Any amount of residual disease after cytoreductive surgery, persistent ascites, and a less pronounced decrease of CA 125 were associated with poor progression-free survival rates. In conclusion, ascites volume reduction and CA 125 decline appear to be appropriate response criteria. A treatment schedule with two preoperative cycles is a reasonable option for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer. High surgical standards are mandatory, even after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Influence of preoperative MRI on the surgical management of patients with operable breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Evaluation of the impact of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast on the clinical management of patients with operable breast cancer (BC). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 160 patients with operable breast cancer (stages Tis through T4), treated from 2002 through 2004. All patients underwent a full mammographic assessment, high frequency breast ultrasound, and breast MRI. The impact of preoperative MRI was evaluated for each patient with regard to changes in the therapeutic procedure. Patient and tumor characteristics were analyzed to identify possible patient subgroups that predominantly would benefit from preoperative MRI. RESULTS: Preoperative MRI affected the clinical management in 44 of 160 patients (27.5%). In 30 cases (18.75%) additional in situ or invasive cancers or a more widespread tumor extent were diagnosed correctly which went undetected by clinical palpation, mammography, and breast ultrasound. In 14 cases (8.75%) additional surgical procedures were performed based on suspicious MRI findings that turned out to be benign in final pathology. Age, menopausal status, breast density, tumor characteristics (type, tumor size, grading), ER-, PR- and HER2-receptor features did not significantly differ between patients in which breast MRI affected the clinical management and patients that experienced no additional information from MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative breast MRI changes surgical management of patients with operable breast cancer. MRI detects additional invasive carcinoma and proves to be a powerful supplement to the conventional work-up in the clinical management of breast cancer. This advantage is independent from patients- and tumor-specific characteristics.

MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing breast cancer in its intraductal stage might be helpful to prevent the development of invasive cancer. Our aim was to investigate the sensitivity with which ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is diagnosed by mammography and by breast MRI. METHODS: During a 5-year period, 7319 women who were referred to an academic national breast centre received MRI in addition to mammography for diagnostic assessment and screening. Mammograms and breast MRI studies were assessed independently by different radiologists. We investigated the sensitivity of each method of detection and compared the biological profiles of mammography-diagnosed DCIS versus DCIS detected by MRI alone. We also compared the risk profiles of women with mammography-detected DCIS with those of MRI-detected DCIS. FINDINGS: 193 women received a final surgical pathology diagnosis of pure DCIS. Of those, 167 had undergone both imaging tests preoperatively. 93 (56%) of these cases were diagnosed by mammography and 153 (92%) by MRI (p<0.0001). Of the 89 high-grade DCIS, 43 (48%) were missed by mammography, but diagnosed by MRI alone; all 43 cases missed by mammography were detected by MRI. By contrast, MRI detected 87 (98%) of these lesions; the two cases missed by MRI were detected by mammography. Age, menopausal status, personal or family history of breast cancer or of benign breast disease, and breast density of women with MRI-only diagnosed DCIS did not differ significantly from those of women with mammography-diagnosed DCIS. INTERPRETATION: MRI could help improve the ability to diagnose DCIS, especially DCIS with high nuclear grade.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging in men: preliminary results.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate whether the descriptors of lesion features and the diagnostic criteria that have been established for breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in female patients may be used for differential diagnosis with breast MR imaging in male patients as well. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design was approved by the institutional review board; all patients gave informed consent. The Institutional Review Board and informed consent information applied to the prospective and any retrospective component of the study. Seventeen consecutive male patients (mean age, 53 years +/- 14) were referred for imaging of a palpable breast mass. In addition to mammography and high-frequency breast ultrasonography, patients underwent dynamic breast MR imaging in a prone position with a dedicated double-breast surface coil. The standardized protocol consisted of a T2-weighted turbo spin-echo sequence followed by a dynamic series. Findings were recorded by using the terminology and descriptors and by evaluating the diagnostic criteria (related to morphology and enhancement kinetics) that have been developed for breast MR imaging in female patients. Validation was achieved at biopsy (nine patients) or follow-up with clinical examination and conventional imaging (eight patients). Because of the small size of the patient cohort, statistical significance was not tested. RESULTS: A total of 24 breast abnormalities were diagnosed. Three patients had invasive breast cancer (five tumors), 11 had gynecomastia (six unilateral, five bilateral), two had pseudogynecomastia, and one had a benign solid tumor (angiolipoma). All malignant tumors appeared as irregular masses with heterogeneous internal architecture or rim enhancement and showed rapid initial enhancement (mean value, 137% +/- 23) followed by a washout time course (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] category 5). Diffuse and nodular gynecomastia showed slow initial and persistent enhancement with normal-appearing parenchymal architecture (BI-RADS category 2; 15 of 16 breasts in 10 of 11 patients). In one patient with biopsy-proved bilateral gynecomastia, an area with segmental enhancement was classified as suspicious for ductal carcinoma in situ. Pseudogynecomastia did not enhance at all. The angiolipoma showed benign morphologic features and slow initial and persistent enhancement (BI-RADS category 2). CONCLUSION: In the small study cohort, the MR imaging features of benign breast diseases and breast cancers in male patients seemed to be comparable to those seen in female patients.

Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for surveillance of women at increased familial risk for breast cancer (lifetime risk of 20% or more). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a surveillance cohort study of 529 asymptomatic women who, based on their family history and/or mutational analysis, were suspected or proven to carry a breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA). A total of 1,542 annual surveillance rounds were completed with a mean follow-up of 5.3 years. Diagnostic accuracies of the three imaging modalities used alone or in different combinations were compared. RESULTS: Forty-three breast cancers were identified in the total cohort (34 invasive, nine ductal carcinoma-in-situ). Overall sensitivity of diagnostic imaging was 93% (40 of 43 breast cancers); overall node-positive rate was 16%, and one interval cancer occurred (one of 43 cancers, or 2%). In the analysis by modality, sensitivity was low for mammography (33%) and ultrasound (40%) or the combination of both (49%). MRI offered a significantly higher sensitivity (91%). The sensitivity of mammography in the higher risk groups was 25%, compared with 100% for MRI. Specificity of MRI (97.2%) was equivalent to that of mammography (96.8%). CONCLUSION: Mammography alone, and also mammography combined with breast ultrasound, seems insufficient for early diagnosis of breast cancer in women who are at increased familial risk with or without documented BRCA mutation. If MRI is used for surveillance, diagnosis of intraductal and invasive familial or hereditary cancer is achieved with a significantly higher sensitivity and at a more favorable stage.

Breast MR imaging during or soon after radiation therapy.

PURPOSE: To investigate the degree and prevalence of radiation-induced changes on breast magnetic resonance (MR) images in patients who were undergoing radiation therapy at that time or soon after, to assess prospectively whether possible radiation-induced effects impair diagnostic accuracy of imaging, and to investigate the prevalence of residual ipsilateral and synchronous contralateral breast cancer in patients undergoing radiation therapy after resection of a supposedly solitary breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 116 dynamic bilateral breast MR studies were performed during and up to 12 months after radiation therapy in 72 patients who had undergone breast-conservation surgery without preoperative MR imaging. Patients were assigned to four groups according to the time span between imaging and radiation therapy. Structural changes, parenchymal enhancement pattern, and prevalence and imaging features of incidental lesions were analyzed and compared with those of the nonirradiated breast. RESULTS: Radiation therapy led to parenchymal edema and a significant (two-tailed paired Student t test) increase in enhancement rates in the irradiated compared with those in the contralateral breasts during and up to 3 months after radiation therapy. Neither during nor at any time after radiation therapy did the mean enhancement rates reach diagnostically relevant rates. Unsuspected residual or recurrent breast cancers were identified in irradiated breasts of five patients and in contralateral breasts of two patients. False-positive MR findings resulted in a biopsy in three patients with irradiated and in one patient with nonirradiated breasts. There was no difference in enhancement kinetics or morphology of benign or malignant lesions in irradiated versus nonirradiated breasts. CONCLUSION: Radiation-induced changes occur at MR imaging during or up to 3 months after radiation therapy but are much less severe than reported. Detection and characterization of lesions were feasible with comparable diagnostic accuracies in irradiated and nonirradiated breasts.