Maximizing Mentorship Throughout Your Breast Imaging Career.

Unlike many other subspecialties in radiology, breast radiologists practice in a patient-facing and interdisciplinary environment where team building, communication, and leadership skills are critical. Although breast radiologists can improve these skills over time, strong mentorship can accelerate this process, leading to a more successful and satisfying career. In addition to providing advice, insight, feedback, and encouragement to mentees, mentors help advance the field of breast radiology by contributing to the development of the next generation of leaders. During the mentorship process, mentors continue to hone their listening, problem-solving, and networking skills, which in turn creates a more supportive and nurturing work environment for the entire breast care team. This article reviews important mentorship skills that are essential for all breast radiologists. Although some of the principles apply to all mentoring relationships, ensuring that every breast radiologist has the skills to be both an effective mentor and mentee is key to the future of the profession.

Creativity, Connection, and Community: Reimagining the Radiology Society Meeting.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: With the shifting needs of radiologists due to escalating healthcare demands, the impetus for an increased focus on wellness and the benefits of the humanities in medicine inspired a novel approach to curricular planning of the 2023 Association of University Radiologists (AUR) annual meeting. In this manuscript, we describe the creative process behind planning and executing this innovative meeting format. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Reimagining the annual meeting was a collaborative effort centered around the development of an innovative Arts and Wellness Program, with the goal of integrating opportunities for artistic expression and experiential wellness throughout the meeting. RESULTS: Of the 1313 meeting attendees, 423 (32.2%) completed the annual meeting evaluation, of which 244 were in-person and 61 attended virtually. 178 of 423 respondents (42.1%) participated in the arts and wellness programming. 160 of 203 respondents (78.9%) reported that the arts and wellness programming enhanced the overall meeting experience. 164 of 197 respondents (83.2%) gained greater appreciation for the talents of radiology colleagues. 97 of 195 respondents (49.7%) stated that the programming gave them ideas as to how to cope effectively with stress. CONCLUSION: The incorporation of art, music, and other wellness activities into a national radiology meeting was well-received by meeting attendees. For many radiologists who participated in the various musical and artistic offerings at the AUR 2023 meeting, sharing artistic talents with the radiology community and colleagues represented the most fundamental way to be fully seen, express authenticity, and connect with others.

Assessing the Relationship between Radiology Department Research Funding and Institutional Community Inclusion and Investment.

Background Health care access disparities and lack of inclusion in clinical research have been well documented for marginalized populations. However, few studies exist examining the research funding of institutions that serve historically underserved groups. Purpose To assess the relationship between research funding awarded to radiology departments by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Lown Institute Hospitals Index rankings for inclusivity and community benefit. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included radiology departments awarded funding from the NIH between 2017 and 2021. The 2021 Lown Institute Hospitals Index rankings for inclusivity and community benefit were examined. The inclusivity metric measures how similar a hospital's patient population is to the surrounding community in terms of income, race and ethnicity, and education level. The community benefit metric measures charity care spending, Medicaid as a proportion of patient revenue, and other community benefit spending. Linear regression and Pearson correlation coefficients (r values) were used to evaluate the relationship between aggregate NIH radiology department research funding and measures of inclusivity and community benefit. Results Seventy-five radiology departments that received NIH funding ranging from $195 000 to $216 879 079 were included. A negative correlation was observed between the amount of radiology department research funding received and institutional rankings for serving patients from racial and/or ethnic minorities (r = -0.34; P < .001), patients with low income (r = -0.44; P < .001), and patients with lower levels of education (r = -0.46; P < .001). No correlation was observed between the amount of radiology department research funding and institutional rankings for charity care spending (r = -0.19; P = .06), community investment (r = -0.04; P = .68), and Medicaid as a proportion of patient revenue (r = -0.10; P = .22). Conclusion Radiology departments that received more NIH research funding were less likely to serve patients from racial and/or ethnic minorities and patients who had low income or lower levels of education. © RSNA, 2024 See also the editorial by Mehta and Rosen in this issue.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Breast Implant Evaluation: 2023 Update.

This document discusses the appropriate initial imaging in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with breast implants. For asymptomatic patients with saline implants, no imaging is recommended. If concern for rupture exists, ultrasound is usually appropriate though saline rupture is often clinically evident. The FDA recently recommended patients have an initial ultrasound or MRI examination 5 to 6 years after initial silicone implant surgery and then every 2 to 3 years thereafter. In a patient with unexplained axillary adenopathy with current or prior silicone breast implants, ultrasound and/or mammography are usually appropriate, depending on age. In a patient with concern for silicone implant rupture, ultrasound or MRI without contrast is usually appropriate. In the setting of a patient with breast implants and possible implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, ultrasound is usually appropriate as the initial imaging. 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.

Predictors of Breast Cancer Outcome in a Cohort of Women Seeking Care at a Safety Net Hospital.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify predictors associated with lower mortality in a population of women diagnosed and treated for breast cancer at a safety net hospital. METHODS: From 2008 to 2014, 1115 patients were treated for breast cancer at our academic safety net hospital. 208 were excluded due to diagnosis at an outside facility, and the remaining 907 (81%) formed the study cohort. Retrospective charts and imaging reviews looked at race, ethnicity, insurance status, social determinants of health, screening utilization, treatment regimen, and 7-13-year follow-up care, including the cause of death. Multivariable logistic regression modeling assessed mortality, and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed. RESULTS: Of the 907 women, the mean age was 59 years (inter-quartile range 50-68 years), with 40% White, 46% Black, 4% Asian, and 10% Other. Increasing age (aOR=1.03, p = 0.001) and more advanced stage at diagnosis (aOR=6.37, p < 0.0001) were associated with increased mortality. There was no significant difference in mortality based on race or ethnicity (p > 0.05). Of 494 with screening prior to diagnosis, longer screening time was observed for patients with advanced stage (median 521 days) vs. early stage (median 404 days), p = 0.0004. Patients with Medicaid, insurance not specified, and no insurance were less likely to undergo screening before diagnosis than privately insured (all p < 0.05). Shorter screening time was associated with lower all-cause mortality (aOR=0.57, 95% CI=0.36-0.89, p = 0.013). DISCUSSION: In a safety net population, a more advanced stage at diagnosis was associated with higher mortality and lower odds of undergoing screening mammography in the two years prior to a breast cancer diagnosis. Early screening was associated with lower mortality. Finally, given no racial or ethnic differences in mortality, the safety net infrastructure at our institution effectively provides equitable cancer care once a cancer is confirmed.

Optimizing the Patient Experience in Breast Imaging Facilities: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review.

Breast imaging studies are complex examinations for patients and providers. Breast imaging providers and organizations invest significant resources in educating patients and referring providers to address variability in changing breast cancer screening recommendations, cultural biases, and socioeconomic barriers for patients. The breast imaging examination frequently involves multiple imaging modalities including interventional procedures, thus requiring multiple room types. Practices need to consider variables that affect workflow efficiency throughout the process of scheduling, examination performance, interpretation, and results delivery, as well as options in facilities design to create inviting yet functional environments for patients. Breast imaging appointments provide opportunity to capture individual breast cancer risk and to engage patients in health education and breast screening awareness. This AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review discusses ways in which breast imaging facilities can optimize patient experience throughout the complex process of a breast imaging examination, based on the authors' observations and opinions that include private and academic breast imaging experience.

Sociodemographic Variations in Women's Reports of Discussions With Clinicians About Breast Density.

Importance: Breast density notifications advise women to discuss breast density with their clinicians, yet little is known about such discussions. Objectives: To examine the content of women's reports of breast density discussions with clinicians and identify variations by women's sociodemographic characteristics (age, income, state legislation status, race and ethnicity, and literacy level). Design, Setting, and Participants: This US nationwide, population-based, random-digit dial telephone survey study was conducted from July 1, 2019, to April 30, 2020, among 2306 women aged 40 to 76 years with no history of breast cancer who underwent mammography in the prior 2 years and had heard the term dense breasts or breast density. Results were analyzed from a subsample of 770 women reporting a conversation about breast density with their clinician after their last mammographic screening. Statistical analysis was conducted in April and July 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survey questions inquired whether women's clinicians had asked about breast cancer risk or their worries or concerns about breast density, had discussed mammography results or other options for breast cancer screening or their future risk of breast cancer, as well as the extent to which the clinician answered questions about breast density. Results: Of the 770 women (358 [47%] aged 50-64 years; 47 Asian [6%], 125 Hispanic [16%], 204 non-Hispanic Black [27%], 317 non-Hispanic White [41%], and 77 other race and ethnicity [10%]) whose results were analyzed, most reported that their clinicians asked questions about breast cancer risk (88% [670 of 766]), discussed mammography results (94% [724 of 768]), and answered patient questions about breast density (81% [614 of 761]); fewer women reported that clinicians had asked about worries or concerns about breast density (69% [524 of 764]), future risk of breast cancer (64% [489 of 764]), or other options for breast cancer screening (61% [459 of 756]). Women's reports of conversations varied significantly by race and ethnicity; non-Hispanic Black women reported being asked questions about breast cancer risk more often than non-Hispanic White women (odds ratio [OR], 2.08 [95% CI, 1.05-4.10]; P = .04). Asian women less often reported being asked about their worries or concerns (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20-0.86]; P = .02), and Hispanic and Asian women less often reported having their questions about breast density answered completely or mostly (Asian: OR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.13-0.62]; P = .002; Hispanic: OR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.27-0.87]; P = .02). Women with low literacy were less likely than women with high literacy to report being asked about worries or concerns about breast density (OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.43-0.96]; P = .03), that mammography results were discussed with them (OR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.16-0.63]; P = .001), or that their questions about breast density were answered completely or mostly (OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.32-0.81]; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, although most women reported that their clinicians counselled them about breast density, the unaddressed worries or concerns and unanswered questions, especially among Hispanic and Asian women and those with low literacy, highlighted areas where discussions could be improved.

Demystifying Breast Disease Markers.

Breast imaging radiologists regularly perform image-guided biopsies of suspicious breast lesions based on features that are associated with a likelihood of malignancy ranging from 2% to greater than 95% (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories 4 and 5). As diagnostic partners, pathologists perform histopathologic assessment of these tissue samples to confirm a diagnosis. Correlating the imaging findings with the histopathologic results is an integral aspect of multidisciplinary breast care. Assessment of radiologic-pathologic concordance is vital in guiding appropriate management, as it enables identification of discordant results, minimizing the chance of misdiagnosis. Undersampling can lead to false-negative results, with the frequencies of false-negative diagnoses varying on the basis of multiple factors, including biopsy type (eg, core needle, vacuum-assisted needle), needle gauge, and type of lesion sampled at biopsy (ie, mass, calcifications, asymmetry, architectural distortion). Improving a radiologist's knowledge of macroscopic and microscopic breast anatomy and more common breast diseases and their expected imaging findings ensures more accurate radiologic-pathologic correlation and management recommendations. The histopathologic and molecular characteristics of biopsy-sampled breast lesions aid in making an accurate diagnosis. Hematoxylin-eosin staining provides critical morphologic details, whereas immunohistochemical staining enables molecular characterization of many benign and malignant lesions, which is critical for tailored treatment. The authors review commonly encountered benign and malignant breast diseases, their corresponding histopathologic phenotypes, and the histopathologic markers that are essential to clinching the diagnosis of these entities. As part of a multidisciplinary team that provides optimal patient care, radiologists should be knowledgeable of the foundations of histopathologic diagnosis and the implications for patient management to ensure appropriate radiologic-pathologic concordance. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

Developing a Late-Career Roadmap to Continued Career Engagement.

Professional development needs span the entirety of a radiologist's career. Great strides have been made in the creation of an infrastructure for early career development. Work is ongoing to develop such resources for mid-career radiologists, given the recent recognition of the needs of this group. Unfortunately, even less attention has been paid to late-career radiologist development needs as a bridge to retirement. As part of the Career Conversations series, this article will highlight the needs and currently available resources for this group.

Current Practices in Anticoagulation Management for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Image-guided Breast Procedures.

Objective: Given variability in how practices manage patients on antithrombotic medications, we undertook this study to understand the current practice of antithrombotic management for patients undergoing percutaneous breast and axillary procedures. Methods: A 20-item survey with multiple-choice and write-in options was emailed to 2094 active North American members of the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) in March 2021. Data were collected anonymously and analyzed quantitatively, with free-text responses categorized by themes. Results: Three-hundred twenty-six of 2094 members (15.6%) completed the survey. Eighty-seven percent (274/313) reported having a policy for managing antithrombotic medications. Fifty-nine percent (185/312) reported routinely withholding medications before biopsy, more commonly in the Northeast and South (P = 0.08). Withholding of medications did not vary by lesion location (182/308, 59%, breast vs 181/308, 58.7%, axillary; P = 0.81). Respondents were statistically more likely to withhold medications if using a vacuum-assisted device for all classes of antithrombotic medications (P < 0.001). Up to 50.2% (100/199) on warfarin and 33.6% (66/196) on direct oral anticoagulants had medications withheld more stringently than guidelines suggest. Conclusion: Based on a survey of SBI members, breast imaging practices vary widely in antithrombotic management for image-guided breast and axillary procedures. Of the 60% who withhold antithrombotic medications, a minority comply with recommended withhold guidelines, placing at least some patients at potential risk for thrombotic events. Breast imaging radiologists should weigh the risks and benefits of withholding these medications, and if they elect to withhold should closely follow evidence-based guidelines to minimize the risks of this practice.