Diagnostic Performance of MRI, Molecular Breast Imaging, and Contrast-enhanced Mammography in Women with Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer.

Background Staging newly diagnosed breast cancer by using dynamic contrast material-enhanced MRI is limited by access, high cost, and false-positive findings. The utility of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and 99mTc sestamibi-based molecular breast imaging (MBI) in this setting is largely unknown. Purpose To compare extent-of-disease assessments by using MRI, CEM, and MBI versus pathology in women with breast cancer. Materials and Methods In this HIPAA-compliant prospective study, women with biopsy-proven breast cancer underwent MRI, CEM, and MBI between October 2014 and April 2018. Eight radiologists independently interpreted each examination result prospectively and were blinded to interpretations of findings with the other modalities. Visibility of index malignancies, lesion size, and additional suspicious lesions (malignant or benign) were compared during pathology review. Accuracy of index lesion sizing and detection of additional lesions in women without neoadjuvant chemotherapy were compared. Results A total of 102 women were enrolled and 99 completed the study protocol (mean age, 51 years ± 11 [standard deviation]; range, 32-77 years). Lumpectomy or mastectomy was performed in 71 women (79 index malignancies) without neoadjuvant chemotherapy and in 28 women (31 index malignancies) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Of the 110 index malignancies, MRI, CEM, and MBI depicted 102 (93%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 86%, 97%), 100 (91%; 95% CI: 84%, 96%), and 101 (92%; 95% CI: 85%, 96%) malignancies, respectively. In patients without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, pathologic size of index malignancies was overestimated with all modalities (P = .02). MRI led to overestimation of 24% (17 of 72) of malignancies by more than 1.5 cm compared with 11% (eight of 70) with CEM and 15% (11 of 72) with MBI. MRI depicted more (P = .007) nonindex lesions, with sensitivity similar to that of CEM or MBI, resulting in lower positive predictive value of additional biopsies (13 of 46 [28%; 95% CI: 17%, 44%] for MRI; 14 of 27 [52%; 95% CI: 32%, 71%] for CEM; and 11 of 25 [44%; 95% CI: 24%, 65%] for MBI (overall P = .01). Conclusion Contrast-enhanced mammography, molecular breast imaging, and MRI showed similar detection of all malignancies. MRI depicted more nonindex suspicious benign lesions than did contrast-enhanced mammography or molecular breast imaging, leading to lower positive predictive value of additional biopsies. All three modalities led to overestimation of index tumor size, particularly MRI. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Grouped Amorphous Calcifications at Mammography: Frequently Atypical but Rarely Associated with Aggressive Malignancy.

Purpose To determine rate of malignancy at stereotactic biopsy of amorphous calcifications with different distributions using current imaging, clinical, and histopathologic criteria. Materials and Methods From January 2009 to September 2013, this retrospective study reviewed a large set of stereotactic biopsies to identify amorphous calcifications and their clinical, imaging, and histopathologic characteristics. Calcification distribution was correlated with malignancy rate after adjusting for known risk factors using logistic regression. Results Of 1903 sequential biopsies, 546 (28.7%) were for amorphous calcifications. After excluding atypical lesions not excised and patients with more than one biopsy in the same year, 497 lesions from 494 women (median age, 52 years; age range, 30-81 years) remained. Fifty-two (10.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.9, 13.5) lesions proved malignant, with 17 of 52 (42.7%) being invasive cancers (median, 0.3 cm; range, 0.1-1.3 cm) and all 17 of them being estrogen and progesterone receptor positive and node negative. Malignancy rates in a segmental (six of 21 [28.6%]), linear (eight of 32 [25.0%]), or multiple group same quadrant (nine of 36 [25.0%]) distribution were significantly higher than malignancy rate in a solitary group of amorphous calcifications (25 of 356 [7.0%]) (P = .004, P = .003, and P = .002, respectively). Of 356 grouped amorphous calcifications, 102 (28.7%) yielded atypical results prompting excision, with three of 102 (2.9%) upgraded to ductal carcinoma in situ at excision. In women younger than 50 years without a personal history of cancer, grouped amorphous calcifications showed four of 127 (3.1%) (95% CI: 0.9, 7.9) were malignant and 39 of 127 (30.7%) were atypical at final histopathology. Conclusion Biopsy of amorphous calcifications remains necessary, with an overall malignancy rate of 10.5%; only 17 of 497 (3.4%) biopsies showed invasive cancer, and all of these were estrogen and progesterone receptor positive. Grouped amorphous calcifications in women younger than 50 years without history of breast or ovarian cancer showed a low malignancy rate of 3.1% (four of 127).

Radiogenomics of High-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer: Multireader Multi-Institutional Study from the Cancer Genome Atlas Ovarian Cancer Imaging Research Group.

Purpose To evaluate interradiologist agreement on assessments of computed tomography (CT) imaging features of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC), to assess their associations with time-to-disease progression (TTP) and HGSOC transcriptomic profiles (Classification of Ovarian Cancer [CLOVAR]), and to develop an imaging-based risk score system to predict TTP and CLOVAR profiles. Materials and Methods This study was a multireader, multi-institutional, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant retrospective analysis of 92 patients with HGSOC (median age, 61 years) with abdominopelvic CT before primary cytoreductive surgery available through the Cancer Imaging Archive. Eight radiologists from the Cancer Genome Atlas Ovarian Cancer Imaging Research Group developed and independently recorded the following CT features: characteristics of primary ovarian mass(es), presence of definable mesenteric implants and infiltration, presence of other implants, presence and distribution of peritoneal spread, presence and size of pleural effusions and ascites, lymphadenopathy, and distant metastases. Interobserver agreement for CT features was assessed, as were univariate and multivariate associations with TTP and CLOVAR mesenchymal profile (worst prognosis). Results Interobserver agreement for some features was strong (eg, α = .78 for pleural effusion and ascites) but was lower for others (eg, α = .08 for intraparenchymal splenic metastases). Presence of peritoneal disease in the right upper quadrant (P = .0003), supradiaphragmatic lymphadenopathy (P = .0004), more peritoneal disease sites (P = .0006), and nonvisualization of a discrete ovarian mass (P = .0037) were associated with shorter TTP. More peritoneal disease sites (P = .0025) and presence of pouch of Douglas implants (P = .0045) were associated with CLOVAR mesenchymal profile. Combinations of imaging features contained predictive signal for TTP (concordance index = 0.658; P = .0006) and CLOVAR profile (mean squared deviation = 1.776; P = .0043). Conclusion These results provide some evidence of the clinical and biologic validity of these image features. Interobserver agreement is strong for some features, but could be improved for others. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Rationale of excisional biopsy after the diagnosis of benign radial scar on core biopsy: a single institutional outcome analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radial scar (RS) is characterized by a fibroelastic core with entrapped ducts and lobules. Association with carcinoma is not uncommon. There is some dilemma as to the need for excisional biopsy or follow-up after RS diagnosis on core biopsy. AIM: To determine the necessity of excisional biopsy after the diagnosis of benign RS by core biopsy. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 67 RS specimens associated with benign findings on core biopsy obtained between 2003 and 2008 were reviewed. They were grouped by their accompanying histopathologic features found upon subsequent surgical excision: benign, high-risk lesion (HRL), or carcinoma. Demographic features, radiologic findings, and needle gauge were compared within subgroups. RESULTS: After surgical excision, 15 (22.4%) patients in the benign group were upgraded to a HRL, 4 (5.9%) patients were upgraded to carcinoma, and 48 (71.6%) remained benign. We found that malignancy is associated with RS more frequently if the patient is older and postmenopausal. Other variables such as symptoms at presentation, presence and type of abnormality on mammography (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System score), breast density, size of biopsy needle used, and number of core samples retrieved did not help to predict the presence of carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: The HRL and cancer upgrade rate of RS, requiring further intervention such as surgery or chemoprevention, is 28% in this study. However, we found that age and menopausal status may be taken into consideration when making the decision to follow up or excise the RS diagnosed on core biopsy. There is insufficient data to support the predictive value of any variables. Therefore, RS associated with benign findings on core biopsy should be excised.

Dose reduction in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening using synthetically reconstructed projection images: an observer performance study.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare the interpretive performance of synthetically reconstructed two-dimensional images in combination with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) versus full-field digital mammography (FFDM) plus DBT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten radiologists trained in reading tomosynthesis examinations interpreted retrospectively, under two modes, 114 mammograms. One mode included the directly acquired full-field digital mammograms combined with DBT, and the other included synthetically reconstructed projection images combined with DBT. The reconstructed images do not require additional radiation exposure. The two modes were compared with respect to sensitivity, namely, recommendation to recall a breast with either a pathology-proven cancer (n = 48) or a high-risk lesion (n = 6), and specificity, namely, no recommendation to recall a breast not depicting an abnormality (n = 144) or depicting only benign abnormalities (n = 30). RESULTS: The average sensitivity for FFDM with DBT was 0.826, compared to 0.772 for synthetic FFDM with DBT (difference, 0.054; P = .017 and P = .053 for fixed and random reader effects, respectively). The proportions of breasts with no or benign abnormalities recommended to be recalled were virtually the same: 0.298 and 0.297 for the two modalities, respectively (95% confidence intervals for the difference, -0.028 to 0.036 and -0.070 to 0.066 for fixed and random reader effects, respectively). Sixteen additional clusters of microcalcifications ("positive" breasts) were missed by all readers combined when interpreting the mode with synthesized images versus FFDM. CONCLUSIONS: Lower sensitivity with comparable specificity was observed with the tested version of synthetically generated images compared to FFDM, both combined with DBT. Improved synthesized images with experimentally verified acceptable diagnostic quality will be needed to eliminate double exposure during DBT-based screening.