Journal of Breast Imaging最新文献

Objective: Our objective was to compare the efficacy of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and digital mammography (DM) in breast cancer screening and their impact on long-term overall survival (OS).

Methods: The study involved 48 549 consecutive mammography examinations between 2011 and 2015 at a medical center in Taiwan, identifying 545 women who were screened and diagnosed with breast cancer. Digital mammography and DBT examinations were alternated on different days. Patients were categorized based on mammographic modality, breast density, and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage. To determine the long-term outcome until August 2021, survival rates were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival analysis.

Results: The mean age at breast cancer diagnosis was 53.2 years. Digital breast tomosynthesis examinations were significantly associated with early breast cancer (AJCC stage 0 to 2) (P = .022). The 5- and 9-year OS rates for all patients were 96.8% and 93.0%, respectively. The 5- and 9-year OS was significantly greater in the DBT group (98.4% and 96.8%) compared with the DM group (95.0% and 90.4%) (P = .030 for all). The K-M survival analysis demonstrated a significantly higher OS in the DBT group than the DM group (P = .037). Furthermore, DBT significantly improved OS in a cohort of women with stage II and III cancer (P = .032) and heterogeneously dense breasts (P = .045).

Conclusion: Screening with DBT is associated with early breast cancer diagnosis and higher survival rates compared with DM.

In evidence-based medicine frameworks, the highest level of evidence is derived from quantitative synthesis of double-masked, high-quality, randomly assigned controlled trials. Meta-analyses of randomly assigned controlled trials have demonstrated that screening mammography reduces breast cancer deaths. In the United States, every major guideline-producing organization has recommended screening mammography in average-risk women; however, there are controversies about age and frequency. Carefully controlled observational research studies and statistical modeling studies can address evidence gaps and inform evidence-based, contemporary screening practices. As breast imaging radiologists develop and evaluate existing and new screening tests and technologies, they will need to understand the key methodological considerations and scientific criteria used by policy makers and health service researchers to support dissemination and implementation of evidence-based screening tests. The Wilson and Jungner principles and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force general analytic framework provide structured evaluations of the effectiveness of screening tests. Key considerations in both frameworks include public health significance, natural history of disease, cost-effectiveness, and characteristics of screening tests and treatments. Rigorous evaluation of screening tests using analytic frameworks can maximize the benefits of screening tests while reducing potential harms. The purpose of this article is to review key methodological considerations and analytic frameworks used to evaluate screening studies and develop evidence-based recommendations.

The nipple-areolar complex (NAC) is an anatomically unique region from which several normal variants and pathologies arise. Understanding its anatomy is crucial for accurate clinical and imaging assessments, aiding with differential diagnosis, and ensuring radiologic-pathologic concordance. Mammography and US are commonly used for NAC evaluation; however, these are susceptible to technical limitations such as tissue superimposition and artifacts, compromising visualization of abnormalities in this area. Although MRI offers higher sensitivity, it is not the initial evaluation modality. A comprehensive clinical inspection is necessary because it may reveal abnormalities not apparent on imaging. This article offers an anatomical approach to the NAC evaluation, simplifying differential diagnoses by reviewing imaging techniques and clinical features of common NAC abnormalities.

Objective: To assess utilization and perceptions of 2D synthesized mammography (SM) for digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) among practicing U.S. breast radiologists.

Methods: An IRB-exempt 23-question anonymized survey was developed by the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) Patient Care and Delivery Committee and emailed to practicing U.S. radiologist SBI members on October 9, 2023. Questions assessed respondents' demographics, current mammographic screening protocol, confidence interpreting SM for mammographic findings, and perceived advantages and disadvantages of SM.

Results: Response rate was 13.4% (371/2771). Of 371 respondents, 208 were currently screening with DBT/SM (56.1%), 98 with DBT/SM/digital mammography (DM) (26.4%), 61 with DBT/DM (16.4%), and 4 with DM (1.1%). Most respondents felt confident using DBT/SM to evaluate masses (254/319, 79.6%), asymmetries (247/319, 77.4%), and distortions (265/318, 83.3%); however, confidence was mixed for calcifications (agreement 130/320, 40.6%; disagreement 156/320, 48.8%; neutral 34/320, 10.6%). The most frequently cited disadvantage and advantage of SM were reconstruction algorithm false-positive results (199/347, 57.4%) and lower radiation dose (281/346, 81.2%), respectively. Higher confidence and fewer disadvantages were reported by radiologists who had more SM experience, screened with DBT/SM, or exclusively used Hologic vendor (all P <.05).

Conclusion: For most survey respondents (56.1%), SM has replaced DM in DBT screening. Radiologists currently screening with DBT/SM or with more SM experience reported greater confidence in SM with fewer perceived disadvantages.

Radial sclerosing lesions (RS, also referred to as "radial scars") and complex sclerosing lesions (CSL) are uncommon breast lesions often grouped together as a single entity in practice. RS/CSL have an incidence of <0.1% to 1% at core needle biopsy (CNB). When detected on CNB, imaging and pathology features must be carefully evaluated to determine appropriate surgical management or imaging follow-up due to potential for malignant upgrade at surgery. Detection of RS/CSL has increased with the advent of tomosynthesis, in which an RS/CSL is typically detected as architectural distortion with or without associated mass with spiculated margins. On US, an RS/CSL is most often occult or manifests as subtle distortion with adjacent cysts. Imaging findings cannot distinguish benign RS/CSL from those upgraded to malignancy at surgery, although larger lesion size may be associated with higher upgrade rates. Histologically, an RS has a central fibroelastotic nidus with entrapped-appearing ducts and proliferative changes at the periphery appearing to radiate from the center; CSL are larger than RS, more disorganized, and typically include multiple patterns of epithelial proliferations, including sclerosing adenosis, sclerosing papillomas, usual ductal hyperplasia, and cysts. RS/CSL with associated atypia at CNB have a 16%to 29% rate of upgrade to malignancy on surgical excision, thus rendering surgical excision essential. Conversely, an RS/CSL without associated atypia, particularly when ≤1 cm in size, has <3% rate of upgrade to malignancy at surgery, allowing consideration of imaging follow-up in lieu of excision. Here, we review recent literature as well as radiology and pathology findings of RS/CSL.

Objective: To evaluate the frequency and factors associated with clip migration in MRI-guided breast biopsies.

Methods: This study was approved by our Institutional Review Board and was compliant with HIPAA. We retrospectively evaluated all MRI-guided biopsies performed between January 2013 and December 2020 in our institution for clip migration. Only patients with follow-up breast MRI showing the clip were included in the study. Migration was defined as movement of the clip of 10 mm or more from the target lesion. Migration frequency and directions were recorded. Factors associated with clip migration were analyzed using statistical tests as appropriate.

Results: A total of 291 biopsies in 268 women were included in the study with 31 migration events recorded (11%; 95% CI, 7%-15%). All migrations occurred along the biopsy tract; 97% (30/31) of them displaced distal to the needle entry site. More than 50% regional fat (around the target lesion) was the strongest factor associated with migration, seen in 21/141 women (15%), compared to 10/150 (7%) with 50% or less local fat (P = .023). Global fatty breast was more loosely associated with migration, showing borderline significance (P = .06). Other factors did not correlate with clip migration, including lesion size, depth, or location; pathology result; breast thickness; or biopsy approach.

Conclusion: Although clip migration after breast MRI-guided biopsy is an uncommon event, it occurs more often when the target lesion is surrounded by fat, with the clip usually displaced away from the needle entry site.

As molecular imaging use expands for patients with breast cancer, it is important for breast radiologists to have a basic understanding of molecular imaging, including PET. Although breast radiologists may not directly interpret such studies, basic knowledge of molecular imaging will enable the radiologist to better direct diagnostic workup of patients as well as discuss diagnostic imaging with the patient and other treating physicians. Several new tracers are now available to complement imaging glucose metabolism with FDG. Because it provides a noninvasive assessment of disease status across the whole body, PET offers specific advantages over tissue-based assays. Paired with targeted therapy, molecular imaging has the potential to guide personalized treatment of breast cancer, including guiding dosing during drug trials as well as predicting and assessing clinical response. This review discusses the current established applications of FDG, which remains the most widely used PET radiotracer for malignancy, including breast cancer, and highlights potential areas for expanded use based on recent research. It also summarizes research to date on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved PET tracer 16α-18F-fluoro-17β-estradiol (FES), which targets ER, including the current guidelines from the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging on the appropriate use of FES-PET/CT for breast cancer as well as areas of active investigation for other potential applications. Finally, the review highlights several of the most promising novel PET tracers that are poised for clinical translation in the near future.

Objective: Changes in a patient's reported breast density status (dense vs nondense) trigger modifications in their cancer risk profile and supplemental screening recommendations. This study tracked the frequency and longitudinal sequence of breast density status changes among patients who received serial mammograms.

Methods: This IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant retrospective cohort study tracked breast density changes among patients who received at least 2 mammograms over an 8-year study period. BI-RADS density assessment categories A through D, visually determined at the time of screening, were abstracted from electronic medical records and dichotomized into either nondense (categories A or B) or dense (categories C or D) status. A sequence analysis of longitudinal changes in density status was performed using Microsoft SQL.

Results: A total of 58 895 patients underwent 231 997 screening mammograms. Most patients maintained the same BI-RADS density category A through D (87.35% [51 444/58 895]) and density status (93.35% [54 978/58 859]) throughout the study period. Among patients whose density status changed, the majority (97% [3800/3917]) had either scattered or heterogeneously dense tissue, and over half (57% [2235/3917]) alternated between dense and nondense status multiple times.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that many cases of density status change may be attributable to intra- and interradiologist variability rather than to true underlying changes in density. These results lend support to consideration of automated density assessment because breast density status changes can significantly impact cancer risk assessment and supplemental screening recommendations.

The economics of health care and payment policy are complex and continually evolving. Breast imaging radiologists may not feel equipped to understand the financial aspect of their practice, but this is a critical competency from residency to senior leadership, especially for breast imaging radiologists. From conducting effective negotiations for new equipment as technology evolves to understanding how insurance benefit design affects patient access to care, breast imaging radiologists need to grasp the financial structures that underpins their practice. Fortunately, resources exist that are appropriate for each career stage, and this article directs the breast imaging radiologist to those resources.