Non-contrast MRI and post-mastectomy silicone breast implant rupture: preventing false positive diagnoses.

BACKGROUND: Breast implants are not lifelong, with implant rupture being the third leading cause of revisional surgery in augmented women. Noncontrast MRI is a reliable tool to assess implant integrity; however, false positive and false negative diagnoses have been reported due to an incorrect interpretation of MRI signs. This study aims to investigate the incidence of these misleading results, comparing MRI findings with intraoperative surgical observations and exploring signs of nonunivocal interpretation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2019 and October 2022, our hospital, a referral center for breast cancer care, conducted 139 breast MRI examinations to evaluate implant integrity. Surgical intervention was deemed necessary for patients diagnosed with suspected or confirmed implant rupture at MRI. Those patients who did not undergo any surgical procedure (63 cases) or had surgery at different institutes (11 cases) were excluded. RESULTS: Among the 65 patients who underwent preoperative MRI and subsequent surgery at our institute, surgical findings confirmed the preoperative MRI diagnosis in 48 women. Notably, 17 women exhibited a discordance between MRI and surgical findings: three false negatives, 11 false positives and three possible ruptures not confirmed. Signs of nonunivocal or misleading interpretation were assessed on a patient-by-patient basis. The importance of obtaining detailed information about a patient's breast implant, including fill materials, number of lumens, manufacturer and shape, proved immensely beneficial for interpreting MRI signs accurately. CONCLUSION: Pre-MRI knowledge of implant details and a meticulous evaluation of non-univocal signs can aid radiologists in accurately assessing implant integrity, reducing the risk of unnecessary revisional surgeries, and potentially averting allegations of medical malpractice.

Patients' Perceptions and Attitudes to the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Breast Cancer Diagnosis: A Narrative Review.

Breast cancer remains the most prevalent cancer among women worldwide, necessitating advancements in diagnostic methods. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into mammography has shown promise in enhancing diagnostic accuracy. However, understanding patient perspectives, particularly considering the psychological impact of breast cancer diagnoses, is crucial. This narrative review synthesizes literature from 2000 to 2023 to examine breast cancer patients' attitudes towards AI in breast imaging, focusing on trust, acceptance, and demographic influences on these views. Methodologically, we employed a systematic literature search across databases such as PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Scopus, selecting studies that provided insights into patients' perceptions of AI in diagnostics. Our review included a sample of seven key studies after rigorous screening, reflecting varied patient trust and acceptance levels towards AI. Overall, we found a clear preference among patients for AI to augment rather than replace the diagnostic process, emphasizing the necessity of radiologists' expertise in conjunction with AI to enhance decision-making accuracy. This paper highlights the importance of aligning AI implementation in clinical settings with patient needs and expectations, emphasizing the need for human interaction in healthcare. Our findings advocate for a model where AI augments the diagnostic process, underlining the necessity for educational efforts to mitigate concerns and enhance patient trust in AI-enhanced diagnostics.

CDH1 Genotype Exploration in Women With Hereditary Lobular Breast Cancer Phenotype.

Importance: Pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline CDH1 variants are associated with risk for diffuse gastric cancer and lobular breast cancer (LBC) in the so-called hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) syndrome. However, in some circumstances, LBC can be the first manifestation of this syndrome in the absence of diffuse gastric cancer manifestation. Objectives: To evaluate the frequency of germline CDH1 variants in women with the hereditary LBC (HLBC) phenotype, somatic CDH1 gene inactivation in germline CDH1 variant carriers' tumor samples, and the association of genetic profiles with clinical-pathological data and survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, longitudinal, prospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 2021, with follow-up until January 31, 2023. Women with LBC seen at the European Institute of Oncology were included. Testing for germline CDH1, BRCA1, and BRCA2 genes was performed. Somatic profiling was assessed for germline CDH1 carriers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Accurate estimates of prevalence of germline CDH1 variants among patients with HLBC and the association of somatic sequence alteration with HLBC syndrome. The Kaplan-Meier method and a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model were applied for overall and disease-free survival analysis. Results: Of 5429 cases of primary LBC, familial LBC phenotype accounted for 1867 (34.4%). A total of 394 women with LBC were tested, among whom 15 germline CDH1 variants in 15 unrelated families were identified. Among these variants, 6 (40.0%) were P/LP, with an overall frequency of 1.5% (6 of 394). Of the 6 probands with P/LP CDH1 LBC, 5 (83.3%) had a positive family history of BC and only 1 (16.7%) had sporadic juvenile early-onset LBC. No germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants were identified in CDH1 carriers. An inactivating CDH1 mechanism (second hit) was identified in 4 of 6 explored matched tumor samples (66.7%) in P/LP germline carriers. The P/LP CDH1 LBC variant carriers had a significantly lower age at diagnosis compared with the group carrying CDH1 variants of unknown significance or likely benign (42.5 [IQR, 38.3-43.0] vs 51.0 [IQR, 45.0-53.0] years; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, P/LP germline CDH1 variants were identified in individuals not fulfilling the classic clinical criteria for HDGC screening, suggesting that identification of these variants may provide a novel method to test women with LBC with early age at diagnosis and/or positive family history of BC.

Comparison of long-term outcome between clinically high risk lobular versus ductal breast cancer: a propensity score matched study.

Background: Abemaciclib is currently approved for the adjuvant treatment of high-risk, lymph node (LN)-positive, hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer (BC). In a real-world setting the clinicopathologic features of patients potentially eligible for adjuvant abemaciclib remain to be defined. There are conflicting data regarding the biological behavior and long-term outcomes across invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). In our study we retrospectively assessed the real-world data and long-term outcome of selected high-risk features ILC compared to IDC, according to the MonarchE trial inclusion criteria. Methods: We identified 15,071 patients who got surgery at the European Institute of Oncology for a first primary, non-metastatic, HR-positive, HER2-negative BC from 2000 to 2008. 11,981 (79.5%) patients had an IDC and 1524 (10.1%) an ILC. The remaining 1566 patients (10.4%) had either combined ductal and lobular breast cancer or another histological breast cancer subtype. According to the eligibility criteria of the MonarchE study, we identified two high-risk groups, based on high number of positive lymph nodes, large tumor size, or a high cellular proliferation as measured by tumor grade or biomarkers. Patients were matched by propensity score. Findings: A total of 2872 (21.3%) patients were selected as clinically high-risk, including 361/1524 ILC (23.7%) and 2511/11,981 IDC (21%). 322 high-risk ILC were matched with similar high-risk IDC. The median follow-up was 13.2 years for survival. In the matched set, invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) (log-rank P = 0.09) and overall survival (OS) (log-rank P = 0.48) were not statistically significantly different between the two histological groups. For IDC patients, the 5-year and 10-year IDFS rates (95% CI) were 77.7% (72.9-82.2) and 57.3% (51.7-63.1) respectively, compared to the 5-year and 10-year IDFS rates of ILC patients that were 75.5% (70.6-80.2) and 50.7% (45.0-56.6). The 5-year and 10-year distant relapse free survival (DRFS) rates were 80% (75.3-84.2) and 65.3% (59.8-70.7) in IDC cohort, compared to the 5-year and the 10-year DRFS rates of 78.7% (74.0-83.1) and 61.5% (55.9-67.1) in the ILC cohort. Such data match the recent outcomes efficacy results of the MonarchE control arm. More patients in the ILC (n = 17) than in the IDC group (n = 10) developed axillary recurrence. At multivariable analysis, stratified for specific clinical features, age <35 years, pT2-3, axillary involvement with more than 10 positive axillary nodes were found to be predictors of unfavorable IDFS and OS in the overall matched high-risk population. Interpretation: Findings from this matched cohort study reported similar IDFS and DRFS rates for high risk HR positive early BC when compared to the control arm overall IDFS and DRFS rates reported from the MonarchE trial. Our study demonstrated rates of concordant long-term outcome status beyond histologic subtype. These data support an escalation strategy for these two different histological entities when diagnosed with high-risk features. In our dataset approximately 21% rate of high-risk HR positive early BC patients are potentially eligible for adjuvant abemaciclib treatment. Funding: Umberto Veronesi Foundation.

Evolving paradigms in breast cancer screening: Balancing efficacy, personalization, and equity.

Breast cancer remains a significant global health challenge, with projections indicating a troubling increase in incidence. Breast cancer screening programs have long been hailed as life-saving initiatives, yet their true impact on mortality rates is a subject of ongoing debate. Screening poses the risk of false positives and the detection of indolent tumors, potentially leading to overtreatment. Bias factors, including lead time, length time, and selection biases, further complicate the assessment of screening efficacy. Recent studies suggest that AI-driven image analysis may revolutionize breast cancer screening, maintaining diagnostic accuracy while reducing radiologists' workload. However, the generalizability of these findings to diverse populations is a critical consideration. Personalized screening approaches and equitable access to advanced technologies are essential to mitigate disparities. In conclusion, the breast cancer screening landscape is evolving, emphasizing the need for risk stratification, appropriate imaging modalities, and a personalized approach to reduce overdiagnosis and focus on cancers with the potential to impact lives while prioritizing patient-centered care.

Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM) compared to Breast Magnetic Resonance (MRI) in the evaluation of breast lobular neoplasia.

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance (detection, assessment of correct disease extent and multifocality/centricity) of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM) Versus Breast Magnetic Resonance (MRI) in the study of lobular neoplasms. METHODS: We retrospectively selected all the patients who underwent surgery for a lobular breast neoplasm, either an in situ or an invasive tumor, and had undergone both breast CEM and MRI examinations during the pre-surgical planning. Wilcoxon Signed Rank test was performed to assess the differences between size measurements using the different methods and the post-surgical pathological measurements, considered the gold standard. The agreement in identifying multifocality/multicentricity among the different methods and the pathology was assessed using the Kappa statistics. RESULTS: We selected 19 patients, of which one presented a bilateral neoplasm. Then, the images of these 19 patients were analyzed, for a total of 52 malignant breast lesions. We found no significant differences between the post-surgical pathological size of the lesions and the calculated size with CEM and MRI (p-value of the difference respectively 0.71 and 0.47). In all 20 cases, neoplasm detection was possible both with CEM and MRI. CEM and MRI showed an excellent ability to identify multifocal and multicentric cases (K statistic equal to 0.93 for both the procedures), while K statistic was 0.11 and 0.59 for FFDM and US, respectively. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that CEM is a reliable imaging technique in the preoperative setting of patients with lobular neoplasm, with comparable results to breast MRI.

Inter-reader agreement of breast magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced mammography in breast cancer diagnosis: a multi-reader retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) are nowadays used in breast imaging but studies about their inter-reader agreement are lacking. Therefore, we compared the inter-reader agreement of CEM and MRI in breast cancer diagnosis in the same patients. METHODS: Breast MRI and CEM exams performed in a single center (09/2020-09/2021) for an IRB-approved study were retrospectively and independently evaluated by four radiologists of two different centers with different levels of experience who were blinded to the clinical and other imaging data. The reference standard was the histological diagnosis or at least 1-year negative imaging follow-up. Inter-reader agreement was examined using Cohen's and Fleiss' kappa (κ) statistics and compared with the Wald test. RESULTS: Of the 750 patients, 395 met inclusion criteria (44.5 ± 14 years old), with 752 breasts available for CEM and MRI. Overall agreement was moderate (κ = 0.60) for MRI and substantial (κ = 0.74) for CEM. For expert readers, the agreement was substantial (κ = 0.77) for MRI and almost perfect (κ = 0.82) for CEM; for non-expert readers was fair (κ = 0.39); and for MRI and moderate (κ = 0.57) for CEM. Pairwise agreement between expert readers and non-expert readers was moderate (κ = 0.50) for breast MRI and substantial (κ = 0.74) for CEM and it showed a statistically superior agreement of the expert over the non-expert readers only for MRI (p = 0.011) and not for CEM (p = 0.062). CONCLUSIONS: The agreement of CEM was superior to that of MRI (p = 0.012), including for both expert (p = 0.031) and non-expert readers (p = 0.005).

Future Directions in the Assessment of Axillary Lymph Nodes in Patients with Breast Cancer.

Background and Objectives: Breast cancer (BC) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and accurate assessment of axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) is crucial for patient management and outcomes. We aim to summarize the current state of ALN assessment techniques in BC and provide insights into future directions. Materials and Methods: This review discusses various imaging techniques used for ALN evaluation, including ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. It highlights advancements in these techniques and their potential to improve diagnostic accuracy. The review also examines landmark clinical trials that have influenced axillary management, such as the Z0011 trial and the IBCSG 23-01 trial. The role of artificial intelligence (AI), specifically deep learning algorithms, in improving ALN assessment is examined. Results: The review outlines the key findings of these trials, which demonstrated the feasibility of avoiding axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in certain patient populations with low sentinel lymph node (SLN) burden. It also discusses ongoing trials, including the SOUND trial, which investigates the use of axillary ultrasound to identify patients who can safely avoid sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Furthermore, the potential of emerging techniques and the integration of AI in enhancing ALN assessment accuracy are presented. Conclusions: The review concludes that advancements in ALN assessment techniques have the potential to improve patient outcomes by reducing surgical complications while maintaining accurate disease staging. However, challenges such as standardization of imaging protocols and interpretation criteria need to be addressed. Future research should focus on large-scale clinical trials to validate emerging techniques and establish their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. Over-all, this review provides valuable insights into the current status and future directions of ALN assessment in BC, highlighting opportunities for improving patient care.

Advancements in Standardizing Radiological Reports: A Comprehensive Review.

Standardized radiological reports stimulate debate in the medical imaging field. This review paper explores the advantages and challenges of standardized reporting. Standardized reporting can offer improved clarity and efficiency of communication among radiologists and the multidisciplinary team. However, challenges include limited flexibility, initially increased time and effort, and potential user experience issues. The efforts toward standardization are examined, encompassing the establishment of reporting templates, use of common imaging lexicons, and integration of clinical decision support tools. Recent technological advancements, including multimedia-enhanced reporting and AI-driven solutions, are discussed for their potential to improve the standardization process. Organizations such as the ACR, ESUR, RSNA, and ESR have developed standardized reporting systems, templates, and platforms to promote uniformity and collaboration. However, challenges remain in terms of workflow adjustments, language and format variability, and the need for validation. The review concludes by presenting a set of ten essential rules for creating standardized radiology reports, emphasizing clarity, consistency, and adherence to structured formats.

An Unenhanced Breast MRI Protocol Based on Diffusion-Weighted Imaging: A Retrospective Single-Center Study on High-Risk Population for Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the use of contrast-free magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an innovative screening method for detecting breast cancer in high-risk asymptomatic women. Specifically, the researchers evaluated the diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in this population. METHODS: MR images from asymptomatic women, carriers of a germline mutation in either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene, collected in a single center from January 2019 to December 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. A radiologist with experience in breast imaging (R1) and a radiology resident (R2) independently evaluated DWI/ADC maps and, in case of doubts, T2-WI. The standard of reference was the pathological diagnosis through biopsy or surgery, or ≥1 year of clinical and radiological follow-up. Diagnostic performances were calculated for both readers with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The agreement was assessed using Cohen's kappa (κ) statistics. RESULTS: Out of 313 women, 145 women were included (49.5 ± 12 years), totaling 344 breast MRIs with DWI/ADC maps. The per-exam cancer prevalence was 11/344 (3.2%). The sensitivity was 8/11 (73%; 95% CI: 46-99%) for R1 and 7/11 (64%; 95% CI: 35-92%) for R2. The specificity was 301/333 (90%; 95% CI: 87-94%) for both readers. The diagnostic accuracy was 90% for both readers. R1 recalled 40/344 exams (11.6%) and R2 recalled 39/344 exams (11.3%). Inter-reader reproducibility between readers was in moderate agreement (κ = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: In female carriers of a BRCA1/2 mutation, breast DWI supplemented with T2-WI allowed breast cancer detection with high sensitivity and specificity by a radiologist with extensive experience in breast imaging, which is comparable to other screening tests. The findings suggest that DWI and T2-WI have the potential to serve as a stand-alone method for unenhanced breast MRI screening in a selected population, opening up new perspectives for prospective trials.

Breast Digital Tomosynthesis versus Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: Comparison of Diagnostic Application and Radiation Dose in a Screening Setting.

This study aims to evaluate the Average Glandular Dose (AGD) and diagnostic performance of CEM versus Digital Mammography (DM) as well as versus DM plus one-view Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT), which were performed in the same patients at short intervals of time. A preventive screening examination in high-risk asymptomatic patients between 2020 and 2022 was performed with two-view Digital Mammography (DM) projections (Cranio Caudal and Medio Lateral) plus one Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) projection (mediolateral oblique, MLO) in a single session examination. For all patients in whom we found a suspicious lesion by using DM + DBT, we performed (within two weeks) a CEM examination. AGD and compression force were compared between the diagnostic methods. All lesions identified by DM + DBT were biopsied; then, we assessed whether lesions found by DBT were also highlighted by DM alone and/or by CEM. We enrolled 49 patients with 49 lesions in the study. The median AGD was lower for DM alone than for CEM (3.41 mGy vs. 4.24 mGy, p = 0.015). The AGD for CEM was significantly lower than for the DM plus one single projection DBT protocol (4.24 mGy vs. 5.55 mGy, p < 0.001). We did not find a statistically significant difference in the median compression force between the CEM and DM + DBT. DM + DBT allows the identification of one more invasive neoplasm one in situ lesion and two high-risk lesions, compared to DM alone. The CEM, compared to DM + DBT, failed to identify only one of the high-risk lesions. According to these results, CEM could be used in the screening of asymptomatic high-risk patients.

Prediction of the Malignancy of a Breast Lesion Detected on Breast Ultrasound: Radiomics Applied to Clinical Practice.

The study aimed to evaluate the performance of radiomics features and one ultrasound CAD (computer-aided diagnosis) in the prediction of the malignancy of a breast lesion detected with ultrasound and to develop a nomogram incorporating radiomic score and available information on CAD performance, conventional Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System evaluation (BI-RADS), and clinical information. Data on 365 breast lesions referred for breast US with subsequent histologic analysis between January 2020 and March 2022 were retrospectively collected. Patients were randomly divided into a training group (n = 255) and a validation test group (n = 110). A radiomics score was generated from the US image. The CAD was performed in a subgroup of 209 cases. The radiomics score included seven radiomics features selected with the LASSO logistic regression model. The multivariable logistic model incorporating CAD performance, BI-RADS evaluation, clinical information, and radiomic score as covariates showed promising results in the prediction of the malignancy of breast lesions: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, [AUC]: 0.914; 95% Confidence Interval, [CI]: 0.876-0.951. A nomogram was developed based on these results for possible future applications in clinical practice.

How Radiomics Can Improve Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.

Recent technological advances in the field of artificial intelligence hold promise in addressing medical challenges in breast cancer care, such as early diagnosis, cancer subtype determination and molecular profiling, prediction of lymph node metastases, and prognostication of treatment response and probability of recurrence. Radiomics is a quantitative approach to medical imaging, which aims to enhance the existing data available to clinicians by means of advanced mathematical analysis using artificial intelligence. Various published studies from different fields in imaging have highlighted the potential of radiomics to enhance clinical decision making. In this review, we describe the evolution of AI in breast imaging and its frontiers, focusing on handcrafted and deep learning radiomics. We present a typical workflow of a radiomics analysis and a practical "how-to" guide. Finally, we summarize the methodology and implementation of radiomics in breast cancer, based on the most recent scientific literature to help researchers and clinicians gain fundamental knowledge of this emerging technology. Alongside this, we discuss the current limitations of radiomics and challenges of integration into clinical practice with conceptual consistency, data curation, technical reproducibility, adequate accuracy, and clinical translation. The incorporation of radiomics with clinical, histopathological, and genomic information will enable physicians to move forward to a higher level of personalized management of patients with breast cancer.

The Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Radiology Field: What Is the State of Doctor-Patient Communication in Cancer Diagnosis?

BACKGROUND: In the past decade, interest in applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) in radiology to improve diagnostic procedures increased. AI has potential benefits spanning all steps of the imaging chain, from the prescription of diagnostic tests to the communication of test reports. The use of AI in the field of radiology also poses challenges in doctor-patient communication at the time of the diagnosis. This systematic review focuses on the patient role and the interpersonal skills between patients and physicians when AI is implemented in cancer diagnosis communication. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Medline, Scopus, and PsycNet from 1990 to 2021. The search terms were: ("artificial intelligence" or "intelligence machine") and "communication" "radiology" and "oncology diagnosis". The PRISMA guidelines were followed. RESULTS: 517 records were identified, and 5 papers met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Most of the articles emphasized the success of the technological support of AI in radiology at the expense of patient trust in AI and patient-centered communication in cancer disease. Practical implications and future guidelines were discussed according to the results. CONCLUSIONS: AI has proven to be beneficial in helping clinicians with diagnosis. Future research may improve patients' trust through adequate information about the advantageous use of AI and an increase in medical compliance with adequate training on doctor-patient diagnosis communication.

Women's perceptions and attitudes to the use of AI in breast cancer screening: a survey in a cancer referral centre.

OBJECTIVE: Although breast cancer screening can benefit from Artificial Intelligence (AI), it is still unknown whether, to which extent or under which conditions, the use of AI is going to be accepted by the general population. The aim of our study is to evaluate what the females who are eligible for breast cancer screening know about AI and how they perceive such innovation. METHODS: We used a prospective survey consisting of a 11-multiple-choice questionnaire evaluating statistical associations with Chi-Square-test or Fisher-exact-test. Multinomial-logistic-regression was performed on items with more than two response categories. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI were computed to estimate the probability of a specific response according to patient's characteristics. RESULTS: In the 800 analysed questionnaires, 51% of respondents confirmed to have knowledge of AI. Of these, 88% expressed a positive opinion about its use in medicine. Non-Italian respondents were associated with the belief of having a deep awareness about AI more often than Italian respondents (OR = 1.91;95% CI[1.10-3.33]). Higher education level was associated with better opinions on the use of AI in medicine (OR = 4.69;95% CI[1.36-16.12]). According to 94% of respondents, the radiologists should always produce their own report on mammograms, whilst 77% agreed that AI should be used as a second reader. Most respondents (52%) considered that both the software developer and the radiologist should be held accountable for AI errors. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the females undergoing screening in our Institute approve the introduction of AI, although only as a support to radiologist, and not in substitution thereof. Yet, accountability in case of AI errors is still unsolved. advances in knowledge:This survey may be considered as a pilot-study for the development of large-scale studies to understand females's demands and concerns about AI applications in breast cancer screening.

Disparities in Breast Cancer Diagnostics: How Radiologists Can Level the Inequalities.

Access to medical imaging is pivotal in healthcare, playing a crucial role in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of diseases. However, disparities persist in this scenario, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals facing linguistic or cultural barriers. This paper critically assesses methods to mitigate these disparities, with a focus on breast cancer screening. We underscore scientific mobility as a vital tool for radiologists to advocate for healthcare policy changes: it not only enhances diversity and cultural competence within the radiology community but also fosters international cooperation and knowledge exchange among healthcare institutions. Efforts to ensure cultural competency among radiologists are discussed, including ongoing cultural education, sensitivity training, and workforce diversification. These initiatives are key to improving patient communication and reducing healthcare disparities. This paper also highlights the crucial role of policy changes and legislation in promoting equal access to essential screening services like mammography. We explore the challenges and potential of teleradiology in improving access to medical imaging in remote and underserved areas. In the era of artificial intelligence, this paper emphasizes the necessity of validating its models across a spectrum of populations to prevent bias and achieve equitable healthcare outcomes. Finally, the importance of international collaboration is illustrated, showcasing its role in sharing insights and strategies to overcome global access barriers in medical imaging. Overall, this paper offers a comprehensive overview of the challenges related to disparities in medical imaging access and proposes actionable strategies to address these challenges, aiming for equitable healthcare delivery.

Digital Twins in Radiology.

A digital twin is a virtual model developed to accurately reflect a physical thing or a system. In radiology, a digital twin of a radiological device enables developers to test its characteristics, make alterations to the design or materials, and test the success or failure of the modifications in a virtual environment. Innovative technologies, such as AI and -omics sciences, may build virtual models for patients that are continuously adjustable based on live-tracked health/lifestyle parameters. Accordingly, healthcare could use digital twins to improve personalized medicine. Furthermore, the accumulation of digital twin models from real-world deployments will enable large cohorts of digital patients that may be used for virtual clinical trials and population studies. Through their further refinement, development, and application into clinical practice, digital twins could be crucial in the era of personalized medicine, revolutionizing how diseases are detected and managed. Although significant challenges remain in the development of digital twins, a structural modification to the current operating models is occurring, and radiologists can guide the introduction of such technology into healthcare.

A Score to Predict the Malignancy of a Breast Lesion Based on Different Contrast Enhancement Patterns in Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography.

Background: To create a predictive score of malignancy of a breast lesion based on the main contrast enhancement features ascertained by contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM). Methods: In this single-centre prospective study, patients with suspicious breast lesions (BIRADS > 3) were enrolled between January 2013 and February 2022. All participants underwent CESM prior to breast biopsy, and eventually surgery. A radiologist with 20 years' experience in breast imaging evaluated the presence or absence of enhancement and the following enhancement descriptors: intensity, pattern, margin, and ground glass. A score of 0 or 1 was given for each descriptor, depending on whether the enhancement characteristic was predictive of benignity or malignancy (both in situ and invasive). Then, an overall enhancement score ranging from 0 to 4 was obtained. The histological results were considered the gold standard in the evaluation of the relationship between enhancement patterns and malignancy. Results: A total of 321 women (median age: 51 years; range: 22−83) with 377 suspicious breast lesions were evaluated. Two hundred forty-nine lesions (66%) have malignant histological results (217 invasive and 32 in situ). Considering an overall enhancement score ≥ 2 as predictive of malignancy, we obtain an overall sensitivity of 92.4%; specificity of 89.8%; positive predictive value of 94.7%; and negative predictive value of 85.8%. Conclusions: Our proposed predictive score on the enhancement descriptors of CESM to predict the malignancy of a breast lesion shows excellent results and can help in early breast cancer diagnosis and in avoiding unnecessary biopsies.

Prediction of the Pathological Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer Patients With MRI-Radiomics: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies using MRI-radiomics for predicting the pathological complete response in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy , and we evaluated their methodological quality using the radiomics-quality-score (RQS). Random effects meta-analysis was performed pooling area under the receiver operating characteristics curves. Publication-bias was assessed using the Egger's test and visually inspecting the funnel plot. Forty-three studies were included in the qualitative review and 34 in the meta-analysis. Summary area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0,78 (95%CI:0,74-0,81). Heterogeneity according to the I2 statistic was substantial (71%) and there was no evidence of publication bias (P-value = 0,2). The average RQS was 12,7 (range:-1-26), with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.93 (95%CI:0.61-0.97). Year of publication, field intensity and synthetic RQS score do not appear to be moderators of the effect (P-value = 0.36, P-value = 0.28 and P-value = 0.92, respectively). MRI-radiomics may predict response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer patients but the heterogeneity of the current studies is still substantial.