Showing papers on "Mammography published in 2004"

Efficacy of MRI and Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening in Women with a Familial or Genetic Predisposition

Abstract: background The value of regular surveillance for breast cancer in women with a genetic or familial predisposition to breast cancer is currently unproven. We compared the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with that of mammography for screening in this group of high-risk women. methods Women who had a cumulative lifetime risk of breast cancer of 15 percent or more were screened every six months with a clinical breast examination and once a year by mammography and MRI, with independent readings. The characteristics of the cancers that were detected were compared with the characteristics of those in two different agematched control groups. results We screened 1909 eligible women, including 358 carriers of germ-line mutations. Within a median follow-up period of 2.9 years, 51 tumors (44 invasive cancers, 6 ductal carcinomas in situ, and 1 lymphoma) and 1 lobular carcinoma in situ were detected. The sensitivity of clinical breast examination, mammography, and MRI for detecting invasive breast cancer was 17.9 percent, 33.3 percent, and 79.5 percent, respectively, and the specificity was 98.1 percent, 95.0 percent, and 89.8 percent, respectively. The overall discriminating capacity of MRI was significantly better than that of mammography (P<0.05). The proportion of invasive tumors that were 10 mm or less in diameter was significantly greater in our surveillance group (43.2 percent) than in either control group (14.0 percent [P<0.001] and 12.5 percent [P = 0.04], respectively). The combined incidence of positive axillary nodes and micrometastases in invasive cancers in our study was 21.4 percent, as compared with 52.4 percent (P<0.001) and 56.4 percent (P=0.001) in the two control groups. conclusions MRI appears to be more sensitive than mammography in detecting tumors in women with an inherited susceptibility to breast cancer.

Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer.

Abstract: PURPOSE: To prospectively assess accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, ultrasonography (US), and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in preoperative assessment of local extent of breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and informed patient consent were obtained. Results of bilateral mammography, US, and contrast-enhanced MR imaging were analyzed from 111 consecutive women with known or suspected invasive breast cancer. Results were correlated with histopathologic findings. RESULTS: Analysis included 177 malignant foci in 121 cancerous breasts, of which 89 (50%) foci were palpable. Median size of 139 invasive foci was 18 mm (range, 2–107 mm). Mammographic sensitivity decreased from 100% in fatty breasts to 45% in extremely dense breasts. Mammographic sensitivity was highest for invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) in 89 of 110 (81%) cases versus 10 of 29 (34%) cases of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) (P < .001) and 21 of 38 (55%) cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (...

Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination.

Abstract: ContextCurrent recommendations for women who have a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation are to undergo breast surveillance from age 25 years onward with mammography annually and clinical breast examination (CBE) every 6 months; however, many tumors are detected at a relatively advanced stage. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound may improve the ability to detect breast cancer at an early stage.ObjectiveTo compare the sensitivity and specificity of 4 methods of breast cancer surveillance (mammography, ultrasound, MRI, and CBE) in women with hereditary susceptibility to breast cancer due to a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA surveillance study of 236 Canadian women aged 25 to 65 years with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations who underwent 1 to 3 annual screening examinations, consisting of MRI, mammography, and ultrasound at a single tertiary care teaching hospital between November 3, 1997, and March 31, 2003. On the day of imaging and at 6-month intervals, CBE was performed.Main Outcome MeasuresSensitivity and specificity of each of the 4 surveillance modalities, and sensitivity of all 4 screening modalities vs mammography and CBE.ResultsEach imaging modality was read independently by a radiologist and scored on a 5-point Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System scale. All lesions with a score of 4 or 5 (suspicious or highly suspicious for malignancy) were biopsied. There were 22 cancers detected (16 invasive and 6 ductal carcinoma in situ). Of these, 17 (77%) were detected by MRI vs 8 (36%) by mammography, 7 (33%) by ultrasound, and 2 (9.1%) by CBE. The sensitivity and specificity (based on biopsy rates) were 77% and 95.4% for MRI, 36% and 99.8% for mammography, 33% and 96% for ultrasound, and 9.1% and 99.3% for CBE, respectively. There was 1 interval cancer. All 4 screening modalities combined had a sensitivity of 95% vs 45% for mammography and CBE combined.ConclusionsIn BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, MRI is more sensitive for detecting breast cancers than mammography, ultrasound, or CBE alone. Whether surveillance regimens that include MRI will reduce mortality from breast cancer in high-risk women requires further investigation.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Breast Prior to Biopsy

Abstract: ContextBreast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to have high sensitivity for cancer detection and is increasingly used following mammography to evaluate suspicious breast lesions.ObjectiveTo determine the accuracy of breast MRI in conjunction with mammography for the detection of breast cancer in patients with suspicious mammographic or clinical findings.Design, Setting, and PatientsProspective multicenter investigation of the International Breast MR Consortium conducted at 14 university hospitals in North America and Europe from June 2, 1998, through October 31, 2001, of 821 patients referred for breast biopsy for American College of Radiology category 4 or 5 mammographic assessment or suspicious clinical or ultrasound finding.InterventionsMRI examinations performed prior to breast biopsy; MRI results were interpreted at each site, which were blinded to pathological results.Main Outcome MeasuresArea under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of breast MRI.ResultsAmong the 821 patients, there were 404 malignant index lesions, of which 63 were ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 341 were invasive carcinoma. Of the 417 nonmalignant index lesions, 366 were benign, 47 showed atypical histology, and 4 were lobular carcinoma in situ. The AUC pooled over all institutions was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.91). MRI correctly detected cancer in 356 of 404 cancer cases (DCIS or invasive cancer), resulting in a sensitivity of 88.1% (95% CI, 84.6%-91.1%), and correctly identified as negative for cancer 281 of 417 cases without cancer, resulting in a specificity of 67.7% (95% CI, 62.7%-71.9%). MRI performance was not significantly affected by mammographic breast density, tumor histology, or menopausal status. The positive predictive values for 356 of 492 patients was 72.4% (95% CI, 68.2%-76.3%) and of mammography for 367 of 695 patients was 52.8% (95% CI, 49.0%-56.6%) (P<.005). Dynamic MRI did not improve the AUC compared with 3-dimensional MRI alone, but the specificity of a washout pattern for 123 of 136 patients without cancer was 90.4% (95% CI, 84%-95%).ConclusionsBreast MRI has high sensitivity but only moderate specificity independent of breast density, tumor type, and menopausal status. Although the positive predictive value of MRI is greater than mammography, MRI does not obviate the need for subsequent tissue sampling in this setting.

Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk.

Abstract: Increased mammographic breast density is a moderate independent risk factor for breast cancer, with findings of published studies in which quantitative methods of assessment were used showing a positive association. Breast density may be quantified by using visual assessment or planimetry. Although the category definitions vary, the odds ratio for developing breast cancer for the most dense compared with the least dense breast tissue categories ranges from 1.8 to 6.0, with most studies yielding an odds ratio of 4.0 or greater. Plausible explanations for the association of breast density with increased breast cancer risk may be the development of premalignant lesions such as atypical ductal hyperplasia, elevated growth factors, or increased estrogen production within the breast due to overactive aromatase. The amount of breast density may be due in part to genetic heredity. However, unlike other risk factors, breast density may be influenced. Specifically, breast density is very hormonally responsive and p...

Sensitivity of MRI versus mammography for detecting foci of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer in Fatty and dense breasts using the whole-breast pathologic examination as a gold standard.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE. Our aim was to compare the effectiveness of mammography and MRI in the detection of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer.SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Ninety patients with planned mastectomies (nine bilateral) underwent mammography and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MRI. Off-site reviewers aware of the entry criterion (planned mastectomy) evaluated both examinations for the presence of malignant foci, recording the density pattern on mammography. The gold standard was pathologic examination of the whole excised breast (slice thickness, 5 mm).RESULTS. Of 99 breasts, pathologic findings revealed 52 unifocal, 29 multifocal, and 18 multicentric cancers for a total of 188 malignant foci (158 invasive and 30 in situ). Overall sensitivity was 66% (124/188) for mammography and 81% (152/188) for MRI (p 0.05, not significant), respectively. Mammography and MRI missed 64 and 36 malignant f...

Changes in breast cancer detection and Mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system

Abstract: Background Computer-aided mammography is rapidly gaining clinical acceptance, but few data demonstrate its actual benefit in the clinical environment. We assessed changes in mammography recall and cancer detection rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system into a clinical radiology practice in an academic setting. Methods We used verified practice- and outcome-related databases to compute recall rates and cancer detection rates for 24 Mammography Quality Standards Act-certified academic radiologists in our practice who interpreted 115,571 screening mammograms with (n = 59,139) or without (n = 56,432) the use of a computer-aided detection system. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results For the entire group of 24 radiologists, recall rates were similar for mammograms interpreted without and with computer-aided detection (11.39% versus 11.40%; percent difference = 0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -11 to 11; P =.96) as were the breast cancer detection rates for mammograms interpreted without and with computer-aided detection (3.49% versus 3.55% per 1000 screening examinations; percent difference = 1.7, 95% CI = -11 to 19; P =.68). For the seven high-volume radiologists (i.e., those who interpreted more than 8000 screening mammograms each over a 3-year period), the recall rates were similar for mammograms interpreted without and with computer-aided detection (11.62% versus 11.05%; percent difference = -4.9, 95% CI = -21 to 4; P =.16), as were the breast cancer detection rates for mammograms interpreted without and with computer-aided detection (3.61% versus 3.49% per 1000 screening examinations; percent difference = -3.2, 95% CI = -15 to 9; P =.54). Conclusion The introduction of computer-aided detection into this practice was not associated with statistically significant changes in recall and breast cancer detection rates, both for the entire group of radiologists and for the subset of radiologists who interpreted high volumes of mammograms.

Incidence of breast cancer in Norway and Sweden during introduction of nationwide screening: prospective cohort study

Abstract: Objective To determine whether any increase in the incidence of breast cancer in women detected by mammography is compensated for by a drop in the incidence after age 69, years when women are no longer invited for screening. Design Population based cohort study of incidence of breast cancer during the introduction of nationwide screening programmes. Setting Norway and Sweden. Participants All women aged above 30 years (1.4 and 2.9 million, respectively, in 2000). Main outcome measures Changes in age specific incidence rates of invasive breast cancer associated with the introduction of the screening programmes. Results As a result of screenin creening is defined as the detection of low malignancy lesions that otherwise would not be detected in a patient9s lifetime. It is often argued that overdiagnosis is not a problem for screening in breast cancer.1 – 3 For example, Boer et al predicted a 31% increase in incidence of breast cancer in the Dutch mass screening programme that would be nearly fully compensated for by a strong drop in the incidence after age 69 years conclusion Without screening one third of all invasive breast cancers in the age group 50-69 years would not have been detected in the patients9 lifetime. This level of overdiagnosis is larger than previously reported

Optical coherence tomography: feasibility for basic research and image-guided surgery of breast cancer.

Abstract: Diagnostic trends in medicine are being directed toward cellular and molecular processes, where treatment regimens are more amenable for cure. Optical imaging is capable of performing cellular and molecular imaging using the short wavelengths and spectroscopic properties of light. Diffuse optical tomography is an optical imaging technique that has been pursued as an alternative to X-ray mammography. While this technique permits non-invasive optical imaging of the whole breast, to date it is incapable of resolving features at the cellular level. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an emerging high-resolution biomedical imaging technology that for larger and undifferentiated cells can perform cellular-level imaging at the expense of imaging depth. OCT performs optical ranging in tissue and is analogous to ultrasound except reflections of near-infrared light are detected rather than sound. In this paper, an overview of the OCT technology is provided, followed by images demonstrating the feasibility of using OCT to image cellular features indicative of breast cancer. OCT images of a well-established carcinogen-induced rat mammary tumor model were acquired. Images from this common experimental model show strong correlation with corresponding histopathology. These results illustrate the potential of OCT for a wide range of basic research studies and for intra-operative image-guidance to identify foci of tumor cells within surgical margins during the surgical treatment of breast cancer.

Screen-Film Mammography versus Full-Field Digital Mammography with Soft-Copy Reading: Randomized Trial in a Population-based Screening Program—The Oslo II Study

Abstract: PURPOSE: To prospectively compare cancer detection rates, recall rates, and positive predictive values at screen-film mammography (SFM) with those at full-field digital mammography (FFDM) with soft-copy reading in a population-based screening program in Norway. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 43,429 women invited, 25,263 women aged 45–69 years attended the screening program and were randomized, with adjustments for age and area of residence, to undergo SFM or FFDM. Two standard views of each breast were acquired. Independent double reading was performed with use of a five-point rating scale for probability of cancer. Recall rates, positive predictive values, and cancer detection rates were compared for two age groups (45–49 and 50–69 years) by using the χ2 test. RESULTS: Overall, 73 cancers in 17,911 women were detected at SFM (detection rate, 0.41%), compared with 41 cancers in 6,997 women at FFDM (detection rate, 0.59%; P = .06). In the group aged 50–69 years, 56 cancers in 10,304 women were detected at SFM (...

Disparities in screening mammography. Current status, interventions and implications.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: This paper describes trends in screening mammography utilization over the past decade and assesses the remaining disparities in mammography use among medically underserved women. We also describe the barriers to mammography and report effective interventions to enhance utilization.

Locally advanced breast cancer: comparison of mammography, sonography and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Abstract: The accuracy of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in identifying residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is evaluated and imaging findings are correlated with pathologic findings. Fifteen patients enrolled in an experimental protocol of preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy underwent clinical examination, mammography, sonography and dynamic MRI, performed in this order, before and respectively after 2 and 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Four radiologists, two for mammography, one for sonography and one for MR, examined the images, blinded to the results of the other examinations. All patients underwent radical or conservative surgery, and imaging findings were compared with pathologic findings. MRI identified 2/15 (13.3.%) clinically complete response (CR), 9/15 (60%) partial response (PR), 3/15 (20%) stable disease (SD) and 1/15 (6.7%) progressive disease. Mammography identified 1/15 (6.7%) clinically CR, 8/15 (53.3%) PR and 4/15 (27%) SD, and was not able to evaluate the disease in 2/15 (13%) cases. Sonography presented the same results as MRI. Therefore, MRI and sonography compared to mammography correctly identified residual disease in 100 vs. 86%. MRI resulted in two false-negative results because of the presence of microfoci of in situ ductal carcinoma (DCIS) and invasive lobular carcinoma (LCI). MRI was superior to mammography in cases of multifocal or multicentric disease (83 vs. 33%). Sonography performed after MRI improves the accuracy in evaluation of uncertain foci of multifocal disease seen on MR images with an increase of diagnostic accuracy from 73 to 84.5%. MRI assesses response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy better than traditional methods of physical examination and mammography.

Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists.

Abstract: Background: Radiologists differ in their ability to interpret screening mammograms accurately. We investigated the relationship of radiologist characteristics to actual performance from 1996 to 2001. Methods: Screening mammograms (n 469 512) interpreted by 124 radiologists were linked to cancer outcome data. The radiologists completed a survey that included questions on demographics, malpractice concerns, years of experience interpreting mammograms, and the number of mammograms read annually. We used receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis to analyze variables associated with sensitivity, specificity, and the combination of the two, adjusting for patient variables that affect performance. All P values are two-sided. Results: Within 1 year of the mammogram, 2402 breast cancers were identified. Relative to low annual interpretive volume ( 2000] 1.89, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.63). Specificity decreased with volume (OR for 1001‐2000 0.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.83; OR for more than 2000 0.76, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.96), compared with 1000 or less (P .002). Greater number of years of experience interpreting mammograms was associated with lower sensitivity (P .001), but higher specificity (P .003). ROC analysis using the ordinal BI-RADS interpretation showed an association between accuracy and both previous mammographic history (P .012) and breast density (P<.001). No association was observed between accuracy and years interpreting mammograms (P .34) or mammography volume (P .94), after adjusting for variables that affect the threshold for calling a mammogram positive. Conclusions: We found no evidence that greater volume or experience at interpreting mammograms is associated with better performance. However, they may affect sensitivity and specificity, possibly by determining the threshold for calling a mammogram positive. Increasing volume requirements is unlikely to improve overall mammography performance. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96: 1840‐50]

Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: a comparative study with mammography and ultrasonography.

Abstract: Background The widespread use of mammographic screening has led to increased detection of small tumors that are often difficult to diagnose with conventional imaging modalities such as mammography and ultrasonography. Intraductal spread of breast cancer, a principle risk factor for local recurrence, is also difficult to diagnose with mammography and ultrasonography. We investigated the clinical usefulness of magnetic resonance imaging of the breast in the therapy of breast cancer and we compared it with mammography and ultrasonography. Study design A total of 183 patients with primary breast cancer underwent surgery at our institute between September 1, 1999, and November 30, 2002. They were examined preoperatively with magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasonography. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation included contrast-enhanced dynamic studies using IV injection of gadolinium-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid. Results Detection rates of breast cancers by magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasonography were 93.7%, 84.6%, and 97.3%, respectively (magnetic resonance imaging versus mammography, p Conclusions Magnetic resonance imaging can diagnose breast cancer as accurately as ultrasonography and more accurately than mammography. Patterns of time-intensity curves correlated with tumor histology. In addition, magnetic resonance imaging can detect intraductal spread more accurately than the other two methods. Magnetic resonance imaging appears to be indispensable in breast-conserving surgery to minimize local recurrence.

Risk for distant recurrence of breast cancer detected by mammography screening or other methods.

Abstract: ContextSelection of systemic adjuvant therapies for women diagnosed as having breast cancer is based on risk estimations for cancer recurrence. In such estimations, tumors detected by mammography screening are considered to be associated with a similar risk of recurrence as tumors of similar size found by other methods.ObjectiveTo compare the risk of recurrence and survival among women with cancerous tumors detected by mammography screening compared with other methods (outside of screening).Design, Setting, and PatientsRetrospective study comparing clinical, histopathological, and biological features of cancerous tumors detected by mammography screening compared with tumors detected outside of screening. Women diagnosed as having breast cancer in 1991 or 1992 were identified from the Finnish Cancer Registry (n = 2842). The median follow-up time was 9.5 years. Cancer biological variables were analyzed from tumor tissue microarrays using immunohistochemistry or in situ hybridization and included ERBB2, TP53, and MK167 expression and ERBB2 amplification data.Main Outcome MeasuresUnivariate and multivariate analyses of potential risk factors for distant recurrence of breast cancer and 10-year survival.ResultsOf the 1983 women with unilateral invasive breast cancer, data on tumor diameter were available for 1918 women. Women with cancerous tumors detected by mammography screening had better estimated 10-year distant disease-free survival than women with tumors found outside of screening (tumor size of ≤10 mm [n = 386] 92% vs 85% [P = .04]; 11-20 mm [n = 808] 88% vs 76% [P<.001]; 21-30 mm [n = 409] 86% vs 63% [P = .008]; >30 mm [n = 315] 68% vs 50% [P = .12], respectively). In a Cox multivariate model that included cancer biological factors, the relative hazard ratio for distant recurrence among women with tumors detected outside of screening (HR, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-3.11) was significantly higher than among women with tumors detected by mammography screening (P = .01). Breast cancer diagnosis by mammography screening was an independent prognostic variable reducing the relative HR for distant recurrence. This effect was equal to or greater than the effect of 1-cm decrease in tumor diameter (HR, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.31).ConclusionsCancerous tumors detected by mammography screening are associated with a better prognosis than tumors of similar size found outside of screening. The risk of distant metastases is overestimated for women diagnosed as having cancer by mammography screening unless the method of detection is taken into account in risk estimations.

Clinical Breast Examination: Practical Recommendations for Optimizing Performance and Reporting

Abstract: Clinical breast examination (CBE) seeks to detect breast abnormalities or evaluate patient reports of symptoms to find palpable breast cancers at an earlier stage of progression. Treatment options for earlier-stage cancers are generally more numerous, include less toxic alternatives, and are usually more effective than treatments for later-stage cancers. For average-risk women aged 40 and younger, earlier detection of palpable tumors identified by CBE can lead to earlier therapy. After age 40, when mammography is recommended, CBE is regarded as an adjunct to mammography. Recent debate, however, has questioned the contributions of CBE to the detection of breast cancer in asymptomatic women and particularly to improved survival and reduced mortality rates. Clinicians remain widely divided about the level of evidence supporting CBE and their confidence in the examination. Yet, CBE is practiced extensively in the United States and continues to be recommended by many leading health organizations. It is in this context that this report provides a brief review of evidence for CBE's role in the earlier detection of breast cancer, highlights current practice issues, and presents recommendations that, when implemented, could contribute to greater standardization of the practice and reporting of CBE. These recommendations may also lead to improved evidence of the nature and extent of CBE's contribution to the earlier detection of breast cancer.

MR mammography in the pre-operative staging of breast cancer in patients with dense breast tissue: comparison with mammography and ultrasound.

Abstract: The aim of this study was to determine whether pre-operative MR mammography could predict the extent of breast cancer in patients with dense breasts or whether dense parenchyma will lead to false-positive or inconclusive examinations. Sixty-seven patients with dense breasts with a malignant breast tumor planned for conservative surgery were reviewed. Detection rates of mammography, ultrasound, and MR mammography were studied, and the diameters of the lesions were measured and compared with pathological examination. Pathology revealed breast cancer in 65 patients. Sensitivity for detection of index lesions was 83% for mammography, 70.8% for ultrasound, and 98% for MR mammography. Mammography underestimated tumor extent in 37%, ultrasound in 40%, and MR in 12.5%. Of the 20 patients (31%) with multifocal or multicentric carcinoma, mammography detected the lesions in 35%, ultrasound in 30%, and MR in 100%, with a false-positive rate of 12.5, 14, and 23%. The MR mammography is more accurate in assessing tumor extent and multifocality in patients with dense breasts, but benign changes may lead to false-positive examinations.

A Breast Cancer Fear Scale: Psychometric Development

Abstract: Fear of breast cancer has been inversely associated with participation in screening. However, investigators have generally used only one item or global scales to measure fear. This report describes development of a fear scale specific to breast cancer. Data from a large study involving mammography adherence were used to test the breast cancer fear scale for validity and reliability. Construct validity was verified through factor analysis and regression analysis predicting mammography. All items loaded on a single factor and theoretical relationships were verified by linear and logistic regression. The Cronbach alpha for the scale was.91.

Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast lesions and effect on treatment.

Abstract: Purpose. To assess the value of local staging with preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with suspect breast lesions and the effect on therapeutic approach. Materials and methods. Two hundred and four consecutive women with suspect breast lesions on clinical examination (CE) and/or mammography (MX) and/or ultrasound (US) underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced MRI. Detection of multifocal, multicentric and bilateral breast cancer by all three imaging modalities was evaluated. Results of preoperative breast MRI were discussed with the treating surgeons. The type of therapeutic change after preoperative MRI was marked on a questionnaire (none, additional fine needle aspiration, core biopsy, open biopsy, wider excision, mastectomy) and considered ‘necessary’ or ‘unnecessary’ using final histopathological results as gold standard. Results. In 170 patients, breast cancer was diagnosed. MRI detected 96% of multifocal disease and 95% of multicentric disease, whereas MX depicted 37 and 18%, and US 41 and 9% of them, respectively. All bilateral breast cancers were seen on MRI; both MX and US detected 56%. Findings of more extensive disease and unsuspected multiple breast cancer foci identified on MRI only, changed the therapeutic approach correctly in 30.6% of breast cancer patients. Nine unnecessary wider excisions and three unnecessary FNA/core biopsies were performed because MRI overestimated the number or size of malignant lesions. Conclusion. Preoperative breast MRI is an important adjunct to conventional imaging in the loco-regional staging of breast cancer and a useful tool in treatment planning.

Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted?

Abstract: PURPOSE: To determine whether palpable noncalcified solid breast masses with benign morphology at mammography and ultrasonography (US) can be managed similarly to nonpalpable probably benign lesions (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] category 3)—that is, with periodic imaging surveillance—and to determine whether biopsy can be averted in these lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: No institutional review board approval or patient consent was required. This retrospective analysis, based on final imaging reports, included 152 patients (age range, 28–77 years; mean age, 48.3 years) with 157 palpable noncalcified solid masses that were classified as probably benign at initial mammography and US. Of 152 patients, 108 underwent follow-up with mammography and US (6-month intervals for 2 years, then 12-month intervals). The remaining 44 patients underwent surgical or needle biopsy after initial imaging. Lesions were analyzed at initial and follow-up examinations. Statistical analysis included Student t...

Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis

Abstract: The outlook for women with breast cancer has improved in recent years. Due to the combination of improved treatments and the benefits of mammography screening, breast cancer mortality has decreased steadily since 1989. Yet breast cancer remains a major problem, second only to lung cancer as a leading cause of death from cancer for women. To date, no means to prevent breast cancer has been discovered and experience has shown that treatments are most effective when a cancer is detected early, before it has spread to other tissues. These two facts suggest that the most effective way to continue reducing the death toll from breast cancer is improved early detection and diagnosis. Building on the 2001 report Mammography and Beyond, this new book not only examines ways to improve implementation and use of new and current breast cancer detection technologies but also evaluates the need to develop tools that identify women who would benefit most from early detection screening. Saving Womena (TM)s Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis encourages more research that integrates the development, validation, and analysis of the types of technologies in clinical practice that promote improved risk identification techniques. In this way, methods and technologies that improve detection and diagnosis can be more effectively developed and implemented.

Decreased rates of advanced breast cancer due to mammography screening in The Netherlands

Abstract: The effect of the implementation of the Dutch breast cancer screening programme during 1990-1997 on the incidence rates of breast cancer, particularly advanced breast cancer, was analysed according to stage at diagnosis in seven regions, where no screening took place before 1990. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided detailed data on breast cancer incidence in 1989-1997 by tumour stage, age and region. Annual age-adjusted incidence rates of all breast cancers and advanced cancers, defined as large tumours T2+ with lymph node and/or distant metastases, were compared with rates in 1989. In general, breast cancer incidence rose strongly in the early 1990s, especially in the age category 50-69 years (estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) 4.25; 95% CI 1.70, 6.86). The increase was mainly due to the increase in small T1 cancers and ductal carcinoma in situ. However, in women aged 50-69, advanced cancer incidence rates showed a significant decline by 12.1% in 1997 compared with 1989 (EAPC -2.14, 95% CI -3.47, -0.80), followed by a breast cancer mortality reduction of similar size after approximately 2 years. We confirm that breast cancer screening initially leads to a temporary strong increase in the breast cancer incidence, which is followed by a significant decrease in advanced diseases in the women invited for screening. It is evident that breast cancer screening contributes to a reduction in advanced breast cancers and breast cancer mortality.

A Prospective Study of Breast Cancer Risk Using Routine Mammographic Breast Density Measurements

Abstract: Mammographic breast density is a major risk factor for breast cancer but estimates of the relative risk associated with differing density patterns have varied widely. It is also unclear how menopausal status influences this association and to what extent the effects of density are due to its correlation with other risk factors. Most recent investigations of breast density have been case-control studies, which provide indirect estimates of relative risk. We have prospectively followed 61,844 women for an average of 3.1 years to directly estimate risk among women in the four mammographic breast density categories defined by the American College of Radiology's Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). The study was population-based and used density assessments routinely made by community radiologists. Cox regression was used to obtain age-adjusted relative risk estimates and to control for other risk factors. Risk increased with density and the risk associated with extremely dense breasts, relative to entirely fatty breasts, was 4.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.7-12.6) for premenopausal women and 3.9 (95% confidence interval, 2.6-5.8) for postmenopausal women. Estimates for pre- and postmenopausal women did not differ significantly. Although breast density was significantly related to body mass index, age at first childbirth, and postmenopausal hormone use (P < 0.001), adjustment for these variables only slightly altered the relative risk estimates. Our results correspond well to those from case-control studies using more quantitative measures of mammographic breast density and suggest that routine Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System density measurements may be useful in models for assessing breast cancer risk in individual women.

The development of interval breast malignancies in patients with BRCA mutations

Abstract: BACKGROUND At present, there is no consensus regarding how frequently BRCA mutation carriers should be screened for malignancies using breast imaging techniques. An interval malignancy is defined as a malignancy that becomes evident during the period between annual screening mammography scans; the finding of such a malignancy indicates that the malignancy either went undetected by the last breast imaging scan or developed during the interval since that last scan. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed the medical charts of all BRCA mutation carriers who were followed by the genetic counselor at the Columbia-Presbyterian Comprehensive Breast Center (New York, NY) between September 1995 and September 2002. RESULTS Thirteen BRCA mutation carriers elected to undergo close surveillance and thus were followed at our institution. Three of these 13 patients (23%) did not develop breast carcinoma, 4 (31%) developed breast carcinoma that was detected at the time of annual screening, and 6 (46%) developed palpable interval malignancies in less than 12 months. Among the six patients who developed interval malignancies, the mean time between the last screening mammogram and disease presentation was 5.1 months (range, 2–9 months); the average tumor size in this patient subgroup was 1.7 cm (range, 0.8–3 cm). Two of these six patients had ductal carcinoma in situ, whereas the remaining four had invasive breast carcinoma; three patients had positive lymph nodes at presentation. All six patients who developed interval disease exhibited dense breast tissue on the previous mammogram. Focused breast ultrasonography was able to identify the tumor mass in 3 of 4 patients (75%). CONCLUSIONS Nearly half of all BRCA-positive women who chose to undergo close surveillance in the current study developed malignant disease less than a year after exhibiting normal findings on screening mammography. Half of these interval malignancies were positive for lymph node involvement. These results suggest that strong consideration should be given to screening BRCA-positive women at more frequent intervals and to using additional imaging techniques, such as breast ultrasonography and/or breast magnetic resonance imaging, as a part of this screening. Cancer 2004. © 2004 American Cancer Society.

Bulk optical properties and tissue components in the female breast from multiwavelength time-resolved optical mammography.

Abstract: We present the results of a clinical study about optical properties and bulk composition of the female breast. The clinical study involved more than 150 subjects that underwent optical mammography. A multiwavelength time-resolved mammograph designed to collect time-resolved transmittance images of the breast at different wavelengths in the range 637 to 980 nm is used to this purpose. From the absorption spectrum of the breast, the concentrations of the main tissue constituents, i.e., oxygenated and deoxygenated hemoglobin, lipid, and water, are obtained for a subset of 113 breasts. The lipid content of breast is estimated for the first time on such a large number of subjects. The total hemoglobin concentration, blood oxygen saturation, lipid, and water content of breast is correlated to demographic information collected during the trial. As expected, breast optical properties and components undergo huge variations among different subjects. Different constituents, however, show interesting correlation with clinical parameters such as age, breast size, body mass index, and mammographic parenchymal pattern. These results suggest that optical measurements on breasts can be exploited to obtain relevant information on breast tissue composition.

Effect of breast augmentation on the accuracy of mammography and cancer characteristics.

Abstract: ContextBreast augmentation is not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer; however, implants may interfere with the detection of breast cancer thereby delaying cancer diagnosis in women with augmentation.ObjectiveTo determine whether mammography accuracy and tumor characteristics are different for women with and without augmentation.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA prospective cohort of 137 women with augmentation and 685 women without augmentation diagnosed with breast cancer between January 1, 1995, and October 15, 2002, matched (1:5) by age, race/ethnicity, previous mammography screening, and mammography registry, and 10 533 women with augmentation and 974 915 women without augmentation and without breast cancer among 7 mammography registries in Denver, Colo; Lebanon, NH; Albuquerque, NM; Chapel Hill, NC; San Francisco, Calif; Seattle, Wash; and Burlington, Vt.Main Outcome MeasuresComparison between women with and without augmentation of mammography performance measures and cancer characteristics, including invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ, tumor stage, nodal status, size, grade, and estrogen-receptor status.ResultsAmong asymptomatic women, the sensitivity of screening mammography based on the final assessment was lower in women with breast augmentation vs women without (45.0% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 29.3%-61.5%] vs 66.8% [95% CI, 60.4%-72.8%]; P = .008), and specificity was slightly higher in women with augmentation (97.7% [95% CI, 97.4%-98.0%] vs 96.7% [95% CI, 96.6%-96.7%]; P<.001). Among symptomatic women, both sensitivity and specificity were lower for women with augmentation compared with women without but these differences were not significant. Tumors were of similar stage, size, estrogen-receptor status, and nodal status but tended to be lower grade (P = .052) for women with breast augmentation vs without.ConclusionsBreast augmentation decreases the sensitivity of screening mammography among asymptomatic women but does not increase the false-positive rate. Despite the lower accuracy of mammography in women with augmentation, the prognostic characteristics of tumors are not influenced by augmentation.

On the efficacy of screening for breast cancer

Abstract: Background ‘Mammography’ (screening for breast cancer by X-ray examination) came to be widely—although not universally—accepted in the 1980s when a number of clinical trials demonstrated a substantial reduction in risk. Early detection, before the disease spread, permitted therapy that was simultaneously less invasive and more effective. Questions that remained were largely about efficacy for younger women and optimal frequency for older women. The consensus was challenged in a series of papers by two researchers at the Nordic branch of the Cochrane collaboration, Gotzsche and Olsen, who concluded that mammography does not save lives: instead, it exposes women to unnecessary surgical procedures. Methods Qualitative review. Results The basis for the Gotzsche‐Olsen critique turns out to be simple. Studies that found a benefit from mammography were discounted as being of poor quality; remaining negative studies were combined by meta-analysis. The critique therefore rests on judgements of study quality, but these judgements are based on misreadings of the data and the literature.