Clinical value of contralateral breast cancers detected by pre-operative MRI in patients diagnosed with DCIS: a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: For patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), data about the impact of breast MRI at primary diagnosis on the incidence and characteristics of contralateral breast cancers are scarce. METHODS: We selected all 8486 women diagnosed with primary DCIS in the Netherlands in 2011-2015 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The synchronous and metachronous detection of contralateral DCIS (cDCIS) and contralateral invasive breast cancer (cIBC) was assessed for patients who received an MRI upon diagnosis (MRI group) and for an age-matched control group without MRI. RESULTS: Nineteen percent of patients received an MRI, of which 0.8% was diagnosed with synchronous cDCIS and 1.3% with synchronous cIBC not found by mammography. The 5-year cumulative incidence of synchronous plus metachronous cDCIS was higher for the MRI versus age-matched control group (2.0% versus 0.9%, p = 0.02) and similar for cIBC (3.5% versus 2.3%, p = 0.17). The increased incidence of cDCIS was observed in patients aged < 50 years (sHR = 4.22, 95% CI: 1.19-14.99), but not in patients aged 50-74 years (sHR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.41-1.93). CONCLUSIONS: MRI at primary DCIS diagnosis detected additional synchronous cDCIS and cIBC, and was associated with a higher rate of metachronous cDCIS without decreasing the rate of metachronous cIBC. This finding was most evident in younger patients. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic resonance imaging at primary diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ detected an additional synchronous breast lesion in 2.1% of patients. • In patients aged younger than 50 years, the use of pre-operative MRI was associated with a fourfold increase in the incidence of a second contralateral DCIS without decreasing the incidence of metachronous invasive breast cancers up to 5 years after diagnosis. • In patients aged over 50 years, the use of pre-operative MRI did not result in a difference in the incidence of a second contralateral DCIS or metachronous invasive breast cancer.

Diagnostic performance of standard breast MRI compared to dedicated axillary MRI for assessment of node-negative and node-positive breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether breast MRI has comparable diagnostic performance as dedicated axillary MRI regarding assessment of node-negative and node-positive breast cancer. METHODS: Forty-seven patients were included. All had undergone both breast MRI and dedicated axillary MRI, followed by surgery. All included breast MRI exams had complete field of view (FOV) of the axillary region. First, unenhanced T2-weighted (T2W) and subsequent diffusion-weighted (DW) images of both MRI exams were independently analyzed by two breast radiologists using a confidence scale and compared to histopathology. ADC values were measured by two researchers independently. Diagnostic performance parameters were calculated on a patient-by-patient basis. RESULTS: T2W breast MRI had the following diagnostic performance: sensitivity of 50.0% and 62.5%, specificity of 92.3%, PPV of 57.1% and 62.5%, NPV of 90.0% and 92.3%, and AUC of 0.72 for reader 1 and 0.78 for reader 2. T2W dedicated axillary MRI had the following diagnostic performance: sensitivity of 37.5% and 62.5%, specificity of 82.1% and 92.3%, PPV of 44.6% and 50.0%, NPV of 87.8% and 91.4%, and AUC of 0.65 for reader 1 and 0.73 for reader 2. In both evaluations, addition of DW images resulted in comparable diagnostic performance. For both breast MRI and dedicated axillary MRI, there was no significant difference between mean ADC values of benign and malignant lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS: T2W breast MRI with complete FOV of the axillary region has comparable diagnostic performance as T2W dedicated axillary MRI regarding assessment of node-negative and node-positive breast cancer. Optimization of T2W breast MRI protocol by including a complete FOV of the axillary region can, therefore, be recommended in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: • Breast MRI with complete field of view of the axillary region has comparable diagnostic performance as dedicated axillary MRI regarding assessment of node-negative and node-positive breast cancer. • Optimization of breast MRI protocol by including a complete field of view of the axillary region is recommended in clinical practice. • For both breast MRI and dedicated axillary MRI, DW imaging (including ADC measurements) is of no added value.

Diagnostic performance of PET/computed tomography versus PET/MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging in the N- and M-staging of breast cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a systematic review regarding the diagnostic performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) compared to 18F-FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) focused on nodal and distant staging in breast cancer patients. METHODS: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant publications until April 2020. Two independent reviewers searched for eligible articles based on predefined in- and exclusion criteria, assessed quality and extracted data. RESULTS: Eleven eligible studies were selected from 561 publications identified by the search. In seven studies, PET/CT was compared with PET/MRI, and in five, PET/CT with DWI. Significantly higher sensitivity for PET/MRI compared to PET/CT in a lesion-based analysis was reported for all lesions together (77% versus 89%) in one study, osseous metastases (69-99% versus 92-98%) in two studies and hepatic metastases (70-75% versus 80-100%) in one study. Moreover, PET/MRI revealed a significantly higher amount of osseous metastases (90 versus 141) than PET/CT. PET/CT is associated with a statistically higher specificity than PET/MRI in the lesion detection of all lesions together (98% versus 96%) and of osseous metastases (100% versus 95%), both in one study. None of the reviewed studies reported significant differences between PET/CT and DWI for any of the evaluated sites. There is a trend toward higher specificity for PET/CT. CONCLUSION: In general, there is a trend toward higher sensitivity and lower specificity of PET/MRI when compared to PET/CT. Results on the diagnostic performance of DWI are conflicting. Rather than evaluating it separate, it seems to have complementary value when combined with other MR sequences.