Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Carla Boetes is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Carla Boetes.


CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians | 2007

American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography.

Carla Boetes; Wylie Burke; Steven E. Harms; Martin O. Leach; Constance D. Lehman; Elizabeth A. Morris; Etta D. Pisano; Mitchell D. Schnall; Stephen F. Sener; Robert A. Smith; Ellen Warner; Martin J. Yaffe; Kimberly S. Andrews; Christy A. Russell

New evidence on breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) screening has become available since the American Cancer Society (ACS) last issued guidelines for the early detection of breast cancer in 2003. A guideline panel has reviewed this evidence and developed new recommendations for women at different defined levels of risk. Screening MRI is recommended for women with an approximately 20–25% or greater lifetime risk of breast cancer, including women with a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer and women who were treated for Hodgkin disease. There are several risk subgroups for which the available data are insufficient to recommend for or against screening, including women with a personal history of breast cancer, carcinoma in situ, atypical hyperplasia, and extremely dense breasts on mammography. Diagnostic uses of MRI were not considered to be within the scope of this review.


European Journal of Cancer | 2010

Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: Recommendations from the EUSOMA working group

Francesco Sardanelli; Carla Boetes; Bettina Borisch; Thomas Decker; Massimo Federico; Fiona J. Gilbert; Thomas H. Helbich; Sylvia H. Heywang-Köbrunner; Werner A. Kaiser; Michael J. Kerin; Robert E. Mansel; Lorenza Marotti; L. Martincich; L. Mauriac; Hanne Meijers-Heijboer; Roberto Orecchia; Pietro Panizza; Antonio Ponti; Arnie Purushotham; Peter Regitnig; Marco Rosselli Del Turco; F. Thibault; R Wilson

The use of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is rapidly increasing. EUSOMA organised a workshop in Milan on 20-21st October 2008 to evaluate the evidence currently available on clinical value and indications for breast MRI. Twenty-three experts from the disciplines involved in breast disease management - including epidemiologists, geneticists, oncologists, radiologists, radiation oncologists, and surgeons - discussed the evidence for the use of this technology in plenary and focused sessions. This paper presents the consensus reached by this working group. General recommendations, technical requirements, methodology, and interpretation were firstly considered. For the following ten indications, an overview of the evidence, a list of recommendations, and a number of research issues were defined: staging before treatment planning; screening of high-risk women; evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy; patients with breast augmentation or reconstruction; occult primary breast cancer; breast cancer recurrence; nipple discharge; characterisation of equivocal findings at conventional imaging; inflammatory breast cancer; and male breast. The working group strongly suggests that all breast cancer specialists cooperate for an optimal clinical use of this emerging technology and for future research, focusing on patient outcome as primary end-point.


Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | 2007

MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature

Ritse M. Mann; Yvonne L. Hoogeveen; Johan G. Blickman; Carla Boetes

PurposeThe clinical diagnosis and management of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast presents difficulties. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been proposed as the imaging modality of choice for the evaluation of ILC. Small studies addressing different aspects of MRI in ILC have been presented but no large series to date. To address the usefulness of MRI in the work-up of ILC, we performed a review of the currently published literature.Materials and methodsWe performed a literature search using the query “lobular AND (MRI OR MR OR MRT OR magnetic)” in the Cochrane library, PubMed and scholar.google.com, to retrieve all articles that dealt with the use of MRI in patients with ILC. We addressed sensitivity, morphologic appearance, correlation with pathology, detection of additional lesions, and impact of MRI on surgery as different endpoints. Whenever possible we performed meta-analysis of the pooled data.ResultsSensitivity is 93.3% and equal to overall sensitivity of MRI for malignancy in the breast. Morphologic appearance is highly heterogeneous and probably heavily influenced by interreader variability. Correlation with pathology ranges from 0.81 to 0.97; overestimation of lesion size occurs but is rare. In 32% of patients, additional ipsilateral lesions are detected and in 7% contralateral lesions are only detected by MRI. Consequently, MRI induces change in surgical management in 28.3% of cases.ConclusionThis analysis indicates MRI to be valuable in the work-up of ILC. It provides additional knowledge that cannot be obtained by conventional imaging modalities which can be helpful in patient treatment.


European Radiology | 1997

False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors

Carla Boetes; S.P. Strijk; Roland Holland; Jelle O. Barentsz; R.F. van der Sluis; J. H. J. Ruijs

Abstract In this study we analyze MR-negative malignant lesions of the breast. A total of 204 patients with palpable and/or mammographic lesions were studied. The MR technique consisted of the turbo FLASH and MP-RAGE subtraction techniques. All patients underwent surgical biopsy and/or mastectomy and all specimens were examined by the correlative radiologic-histologic mapping technique. A total of 208 lesions were evaluated; 145 turned out to be malignant and 63 proved to be benign. Six malignant lesions were misinterpreted as benign on MR imaging; thus, suspicious contrast enhancement was present in 96 % of the lesions detected by mammography, US, or clinical examination. Especially 4 of the 17 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions were misinterpreted (23.5 %). Despite optimal technique, 6 malignant lesions were not identified by MR imaging. The highest prevalence of these MR occult lesions was in the group of DCIS. Although MR imaging has an important role in the evaluation of breast lesions and, primarily, in ruling out malignancy, one should be aware of the fact that false-negative MR findings do occur.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2010

BRCA1-Associated Breast Cancers Present Differently From BRCA2-Associated and Familial Cases: Long-Term Follow-Up of the Dutch MRISC Screening Study

A.J. Rijnsburger; Inge-Marie Obdeijn; R. Kaas; Madeleine M. A. Tilanus-Linthorst; Carla Boetes; Claudette E. Loo; Martin N. J. M. Wasser; Elisabeth Bergers; Theo Kok; Sara H. Muller; Hans Peterse; Rob A. E. M. Tollenaar; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge; Sybren Meijer; C.C.M. Bartels; Caroline Seynaeve; Maartje J. Hooning; Mieke Kriege; P.I.M. Schmitz; Jan C. Oosterwijk; Harry J. de Koning; Emiel J. Th. Rutgers; J.G.M. Klijn

PURPOSE The Dutch MRI Screening Study on early detection of hereditary breast cancer started in 1999. We evaluated the long-term results including separate analyses of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and first results on survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS Women with higher than 15% cumulative lifetime risk (CLTR) of breast cancer were screened with biannual clinical breast examination and annual mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Participants were divided into subgroups: carriers of a gene mutation (50% to 85% CLTR) and two familial groups with high (30% to 50% CLTR) or moderate risk (15% to 30% CLTR). RESULTS Our update contains 2,157 eligible women including 599 mutation carriers (median follow-up of 4.9 years from entry) with 97 primary breast cancers detected (median follow-up of 5.0 years from diagnosis). MRI sensitivity was superior to that of mammography for invasive cancer (77.4% v 35.5%; P<.00005), but not for ductal carcinoma in situ. Results in the BRCA1 group were worse compared to the BRCA2, the high-, and the moderate-risk groups, respectively, for mammography sensitivity (25.0% v 61.5%, 45.5%, 46.7%), tumor size at diagnosis≤1 cm (21.4% v 61.5%, 40.9%, 63.6%), proportion of DCIS (6.5% v 18.8%, 14.8%, 31.3%) and interval cancers (32.3% v 6.3%, 3.7%, 6.3%), and age at diagnosis younger than 30 years (9.7% v 0%). Cumulative distant metastasis-free and overall survival at 6 years in all 42 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with invasive breast cancer were 83.9% (95% CI, 64.1% to 93.3%) and 92.7% (95% CI, 79.0% to 97.6%), respectively, and 100% in the familial groups (n=43). CONCLUSION Screening results were somewhat worse in BRCA1 mutation carriers, but 6-year survival was high in all risk groups.


Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | 2004

The role of MRI in invasive lobular carcinoma.

Carla Boetes; Jeroen Veltman; Lya van Die; Peter Bult; Theo Wobbes; Jelle O. Barentsz

AbstractPurpose. To determine the value of MR imaging in the detection and measurement of tumor size in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) compared to mammography and ultrasound. Materials and methods. From 36 cases of ILC in 34 patients who were surgically treated, the pre-operative imaging measurements, being mammography, ultrasound and contrast enhanced MR, were retrospectively re-evaluated for tumor detection and size. Findings were compared with pathology. Two radiologists were used for evaluation of the mammograms, the other imaging modalities were only evaluated by one radiologist. The Pearsons correlation test was used to determine the correlation between histopathological and imaging measurements for each imaging modality. Results. For mammography, ultrasound and MRI the false negative scores were respectively 14%, 3% and 0%. The percentage for underestimated, correctly estimated and overestimated measurements on imaging were 56%, 33% and 11% for radiologist 1 and 50%, 33% and 17% for radiologist 2 on mammography. For ultrasound and MRI these percentages were respectively 53%, 47%, 0% and 14%, 75%, 11%. The correlation coefficients for mammography were respectively r= 0.34 (p < 0.05) and r= 0.27 (p > 0.05) for both radiologists, for Ultrasound r= 0.24 (p > 0.05) and for MRI r= 0.81 (p < 0.01). Conclusion. Of the three imaging modalities contrast enhanced MR has the lowest false negative rate in detecting ILC and has the highest accuracy in measuring the size of the ILC. MR could play a key role in the pre-operative work-up for accurate tumor size determination.


Cancer | 2006

Differences between first and subsequent rounds of the MRISC breast cancer screening program for women with a familial or genetic predisposition

Mieke Kriege; Cecile T.M. Brekelmans; Carla Boetes; Sara H. Muller; Harmine M. Zonderland; Inge Marie Obdeijn; Radu A. Manoliu; Theo Kok; Emiel J. Th. Rutgers; Harry J. de Koning; J.G.M. Klijn

Within the Dutch MRI Screening (MRISC) study, a Dutch multicenter screening study for hereditary breast cancer, the authors investigated whether previously reported increased diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared with mammography would be maintained during subsequent screening rounds.


American Journal of Surgery | 2009

Magnetic resonance imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ: what is its clinical application? A review

Arjan P. Schouten van der Velden; Margrethe Schlooz-Vries; Carla Boetes; Theo Wobbes

BACKGROUND After breast-conserving surgery of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast or invasive breast carcinoma with an extensive intraductal component, tumor-positive surgical margins are frequently found. Therefore, the extent of the intraductal disease needs to be accurately determined preoperatively. METHODS Data for this review were identified by search of PubMed. Reference lists of selected articles were cross-searched for additional literature. RESULTS DCIS is accurately detected with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), but the typical malignant features are inconsistently seen and most often in high-grade DCIS or in DCIS with a small invasive component. The histopathologic extent of DCIS is more accurately demonstrated with MRI. However, overestimation due to benign proliferative lesions does frequently occur. An improved depiction of DCIS could lead to improved preoperative staging. Conversely, the identification of more extensive disease on MRI could give rise to unnecessary interventions. Therefore, MRI should be used carefully and preferable in specialized and experienced centers. CONCLUSION [corrected] To date, there is no evidence that the use of MRI improves outcomes (ie, decreases recurrence rates) in patients with DCIS.


European Radiology | 2008

Breast tumor characteristics of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers on MRI

J. Veltman; R. Mann; Theo Kok; Inge-Marie Obdeijn; Nicoline Hoogerbrugge; Johan G. Blickman; Carla Boetes

The appearance of malignant lesions in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers (BRCA-MCs) on mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was evaluated. Thus, 29 BRCA-MCs with breast cancer were retrospectively evaluated and the results compared with an age, tumor size and tumor type matched control group of 29 sporadic breast cancer cases. Detection rates on both modalities were evaluated. Tumors were analyzed on morphology, density (mammography), enhancement pattern and kinetics (MRI). Overall detection was significantly better with MRI than with mammography (55/58 vs 44/57, P = 0.021). On mammography, lesions in the BRCA-MC group were significantly more described as rounded (12//19 vs 3/13, P = 0.036) and with sharp margins (9/19 vs 1/13, P = 0.024). On MRI lesions in the BRCA-MC group were significantly more described as rounded (16/27 vs 7/28, P = 0.010), with sharp margins (20/27 vs 7/28, P < 0.001) and with rim enhancement (7/27 vs 1/28, P = 0.025). No significant difference was found for enhancement kinetics (P = 0.667). Malignant lesions in BRCA-MC frequently have morphological characteristics commonly seen in benign lesions, like a rounded shape or sharp margins. This applies for both mammography and MRI. However the possibility of MRI to evaluate the enhancement pattern and kinetics enables the detection of characteristics suggestive for a malignancy.


Familial Cancer | 2001

MRI screening for breast cancer in women with familial or genetic predisposition: design of the Dutch National Study (MRISC).

Mieke Kriege; C.T.M. Brekelmans; Carla Boetes; Emiel J. Rutgers; Jan C. Oosterwijk; Rob A. E. M. Tollenaar; R. A. Manoliu; Roland Holland; H.J. de Koning; J.G.M. Klijn

Mammography screening of women aged 50–70 years for breast cancer has proven to be effective in reducing breast cancer mortality. There is no consensus about the value of breast cancer screening in women aged 40–49 years. Five to ten per cent of all breast cancers are hereditary. One of the options to reduce the risk of breast cancer mortality for women with a familial or genetic predisposition is intensive surveillance. However, the effectiveness of mammography screening for breast cancer in these women, who are mainly younger than 50 years, is unproven. MRI might increase the effectiveness of screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. This paper describes the design of the Dutch national study for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. The aims of this study are to investigate: the value of regular surveillance in women with a familial or genetic predisposition for breast cancer, the efficacy of MRI as compared to mammography, cost-effectiveness of regular screening and quality of life during surveillance. Included are women with a lifetime risk of familial breast cancer of 15% or more or BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, who visit one of the Dutch family cancer clinics. The aim is to include 2,500 women. The study started on 1 November 1999. On 1 January 2002, more than 1700 women, including 210 proven carriers of a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, were included in the study.

Collaboration


Dive into the Carla Boetes's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

J.G.M. Klijn

Erasmus University Rotterdam

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mieke Kriege

Erasmus University Rotterdam

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jelle O. Barentsz

Radboud University Nijmegen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Radu A. Manoliu

VU University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Elizabeth A. Morris

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ritse M. Mann

Radboud University Nijmegen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Theo Kok

University of Groningen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

H.J. de Koning

Erasmus University Rotterdam

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Harmine M. Zonderland

Leiden University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge