Derek Muradali

Effectiveness of Screening With Annual Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Mammography: Results of the Initial Screen From the Ontario High Risk Breast Screening Program

PURPOSE The Ontario Breast Screening Program expanded in July 2011 to screen women age 30 to 69 years at high risk for breast cancer with annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and digital mammography. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first organized screening program for women at high risk for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Performance measures after assessment were compared with screening results for 2,207 women with initial screening examinations. The following criteria were used to determine eligibility: known mutation in BRCA1, BRCA2, or other gene predisposing to a markedly increased risk of breast cancer, untested first-degree relative of a gene mutation carrier, family history consistent with hereditary breast cancer syndrome and estimated personal lifetime breast cancer risk ≥ 25%, or radiation therapy to the chest (before age 30 years and at least 8 years previously). RESULTS The recall rate was significantly higher among women who had abnormal MRI alone (15.1%; 95% CI, 13.8% to 16.4%) compared with mammogram alone (6.4%; 95% CI, 5.5% to 7.3%). Of the 35 breast cancers detected (16.3 per 1,000; 95% CI, 11.2 to 22.2), none were detected by mammogram alone, 23 (65.7%) were detected by MRI alone (10.7 per 1,000; 95% CI, 6.7 to 15.8), and 25 (71%) were detected among women who were known gene mutation carriers (30.8 per 1,000, 95% CI, 19.4 to 43.7). The positive predictive value was highest for detection based on mammogram and MRI (12.4%; 95% CI, 7.3% to 19.3%). CONCLUSION Screening with annual MRI combined with mammography has the potential to be effectively implemented into an organized breast screening program for women at high risk for breast cancer. This could be considered an important management option for known BRCA gene mutation carriers.

Digital compared with screen-film mammography: performance measures in concurrent cohorts within an organized breast screening program.

PURPOSE To evaluate the performance of digital direct radiography (DR) and computed radiography (CR) compared with that of screen-film mammography (SFM) in large concurrent cohorts. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study was approved by the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board and did not require informed consent. Concurrent cohorts of women aged 50-74 years screened with DR (n = 220 520), CR (n = 64 210), or SFM (n = 403 688) between 2008 and 2009 were identified and followed for 12 months. Performance was compared between cohorts, with SFM as the referent cohort. Associations were examined by using mixed-effect logistic regression. RESULTS The cancer detection rate was similar for DR (4.9 per 1000; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.7, 5.2) and SFM (4.8 per 1000; 95% CI: 4.7, 5.0); however, the rate was significantly lower for CR (3.4 per 1000; 95% CI: 3.0, 3.9) (odds ratio, 0.79; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.93). Recall rates were higher for DR (7.7%; 95% CI: 7.6%, 7.8%) and lower for CR (6.6%; 95% CI: 6.5%, 6.7%) than for SFM (7.4%; 95% CI: 7.3%, 7.5%). Positive predictive value was lower for CR (5.2%; 95% CI: 4.7%, 5.8%) than for SFM (6.6%; 95% CI: 6.4%, 6.8%); however, the adjusted odds were not significant. CONCLUSION Although DR is equivalent to SFM for breast screening among women aged 50-74 years, the cancer detection rate was lower for CR. Screening programs should monitor the performance of CR separately and may consider informing women of the potentially lower cancer detection rates.

Papillary lesions of the breast: MRI, ultrasound, and mammographic appearances

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this article is to describe the different imaging appearances of benign and malignant papillary lesions of the breast as well as to point out potential errors of interpretation that can lead to misdiagnosis. CONCLUSION There is a wide spectrum of appearances of papillary lesions of the breast on MRI, ultrasound, and mammography. This variable appearance of papillary lesions makes differentiation of benign from malignant pathologies difficult on imaging, and tissue sampling is usually warranted.

Papillary Lesions of the Breast: Impact of Breast Pathology Subspecialization on Core Biopsy and Excision Diagnoses

Background:Classifying papillary lesions of the breast on core biopsy (CB) is challenging. Although traditionally all such lesions were surgically excised, at present, conservative management of benign lesions is being advocated; therefore, accurately classifying papillary lesions on CB is all the more imperative. The extent to which subspecialty training in breast pathology might mitigate such difficulties in diagnosis has not yet been reported. We investigated change in diagnoses from CB to surgical excision according to subspecialist training in breast pathology and interobserver agreement between specialized breast pathologists (BPs) and nonbreast pathologists (NBPs) in classifying these lesions. Design:CBs of 281 papillary lesions from 266 patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2010 were classified by both a BP and NBP into benign, atypical, ductal carcinoma in situ/encapsulated papillary carcinoma, or invasive carcinoma categories. Rates of change in diagnostic category in the surgical excision specimen were calculated on the basis of: (i) the original diagnosis, (ii) diagnosis made by the BP, and (iii) diagnosis made by the NBP. Comparisons were made using the &khgr;2 test. Kappa values were calculated for interobserver agreement. Results:Of 162 lesions with subsequent excision, 90 were originally diagnosed as benign, 38 as atypical, 25 as ductal carcinoma in situ/encapsulated papillary carcinoma, and 9 as invasive on CB. The upgrade rate for benign papillomas to an atypical or malignant lesion on surgical excision was 22.2% according to the original diagnosis. This rate fell to 16.3% when the BP diagnoses were considered, compared with 26.3% for the NBP diagnoses. There was no significant difference between BPs and NBPs in the rate of upgrade from a benign to an atypical/malignant diagnosis, although downgrades from atypical/malignant to benign papillomas were more commonly seen among NBPs (P=0.002). Overall, the BP diagnosis on CB was less likely to differ from the excision diagnosis (P=0.0001). Benign papillomas upgraded on excision were more likely to occur with larger radiologic mass size (P=0.033) compared with those that were not upgraded. Of 8 benign papillomas upgraded to a malignant lesion on excision, 7 were discordant on radiology. Interobserver agreement between BP and NBP diagnoses was in the “fair agreement” range (&kgr;=0.38), with perfect agreement in 66.4% of cases. Conclusions:Correlation between CB and excision diagnoses for breast papillary lesions is significantly greater for BPs than for NBPs. This is largely because of a tendency to overcall atypia or malignancy on CB by NBPs. However, upgrades from benign to atypical or malignant did not significantly differ according to subspecialization. With accurate pathologic assessment and radiologic-pathologic correlation, the upgrade rate of benign papillomas to malignancy can be minimized significantly.

Digital Compared with Screen-Film Mammography: Measures of Diagnostic Accuracy among Women Screened in the Ontario Breast Screening Program

PURPOSE To compare measures of diagnostic accuracy between large concurrent cohorts of women screened with digital computed radiography (CR), direct radiography (DR), and screen-film mammography (SFM). MATERIALS AND METHODS This study was approved by the University of Toronto Research Ethics Board; informed consent was not required. Three concurrent cohorts of women aged 50-74 years who were screened from 2008-2009 in the Ontario Breast Screening Program with SFM (487,334 screening examinations, 403,688 women), DR (254,758 screening examinations, 220,520 women), or CR (74,140 screening examinations, 64,210 women) were followed for 2 years or until breast cancer diagnosis. Breast cancers were classified as screening-detected or interval on the basis of the womans final screening and assessment results. Interval cancer rate (per 10 000 negative screening examinations), sensitivity, and specificity were compared across the cohorts by using mixed-effects logistic regression analysis. RESULTS Interval cancer rates were higher, although not significantly so, for CR (15.2 per 10,000; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.8, 17.8) and were similar for DR (13.7 per 10,000; 95% CI: 12.4, 15.0) compared with SFM (13.0 per 10,000; 95% CI: 12.1, 13.9). For CR versus SFM, specificity was similar while sensitivity was significantly lower (odds ratio [OR] = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.47, 0.83; P = .001), particularly for invasive cancers detected at a rescreening examination, for women with breast density of less than 75%, for women with no family history, and for postmenopausal women. For DR versus SFM, sensitivity was similar while specificity was lower (OR = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87, 0.98; P = .01), particularly for rescreening examinations, for women aged 60-74 years, for women with breast density of less than 75%, for women with a family history, and for women who were postmenopausal. CONCLUSION Given the 38% lower sensitivity of CR imaging systems compared with SFM, programs should assess the continued use of this technology for breast screening.

Arteriovenous Fistulas for Hemodialysis: Application of High-Frequency US to Assess Vein Wall Morphology for Cannulation Readiness

PURPOSE To determine whether venous wall thickness and hoop (circumferential) stress, as determined with high-frequency ultrasonography (US), can predict cannulation readiness in arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs). MATERIALS AND METHODS Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained for this prospective study. To determine the US appearance of the venous wall, an AVF specimen was excised and scanned in a bath of degassed lactated Ringer solution with a 55-MHz probe. The appearance of the wall at high-frequency US was correlated with histologic findings. High-frequency (40-55-MHz) US was used to image the near-field AVF venous wall of 14 men (mean age, 59 years ± 11 [standard deviation]) and six women (mean age, 55 years ± 14) with newly created AVFs within 1 week of cannulation between January 2008 and December 2009. Measurements of the intima-media thickness (IMT) were generated by three independent observers who were blinded to outcomes. Intraclass correlation analysis was performed. Cannulation readiness was defined as no extravasation during the first dialysis treatment. RESULTS By using high-frequency US, the IMT was defined as the sum of a thin echogenic blood-intima interface and a uniform hypoechoic media. The mean IMT of the no extravasation group (0.16 mm ± 0.03) was greater than that of the extravasation group (0.10 mm ± 0.02) (P < .001). A minimum threshold IMT of 0.13 mm (P < .001) was associated with successful cannulation. The mean hoop stress of the no extravasation group (246 kPa ± 57) was lower than that of the extravasation group (530 kPa ± 199) (P < .001). A maximum hoop stress threshold of 248 kPa was associated with successful cannulation (P = .009). CONCLUSION Venous IMT and hoop stress assessed with high-frequency US can predict cannulation readiness in AVFs that are clinically deemed mature.

US of Gastrointestinal Tract Disease

The potential use of ultrasonography (US) in evaluating gut disease has been underappreciated in most diagnostic imaging departments in North America. The impression that US has a questionable role in bowel assessment is related to the operator-dependent nature of the modality, the technical challenges of performing bowel US examinations, and the lack of familiarity of radiologists and technologists with the US appearances of normal and abnormal bowel. However, with development of technical experience by the sonographer and integration of a clinical focus at patient evaluation, US can become a powerful tool for bowel assessment. Unlike computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, it provides a widely available, noninvasive, inexpensive method for evaluating the gut without the use of ionizing radiation. These factors are of particular importance in young patients and those who require recurrent follow-up imaging. Because US is performed with real-time imaging, the modality also allows the sonographer to view and assess the motility properties of the bowel, a feature that has not been previously used to its full potential. Color Doppler US can yield useful information about mural vascularity in bowel disease when used in conjunction with gray-scale findings and clinical symptoms. Radiologists should be familiar with the static and dynamic US appearances of the normal and abnormal bowel, recognize features of various pathologic conditions, and understand potential errors at imaging interpretation. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Evaluating wait times from screening to breast cancer diagnosis among women undergoing organised assessment vs usual care

Background:Timely coordinated diagnostic assessment following an abnormal screening mammogram reduces patient anxiety and may optimise breast cancer prognosis. Since 1998, the Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) has offered organised assessment through Breast Assessment Centres (BACs). For OBSP women seen at a BAC, an abnormal mammogram is followed by coordinated referrals through the use of navigators for further imaging, biopsy, and surgical consultation as indicated. For OBSP women seen through usual care (UC), further diagnostic imaging is arranged directly from the screening centre and/or through their physician; results must be communicated to the physician who is then responsible for arranging any necessary biopsy and/or surgical consultation. This study aims to evaluate factors associated with diagnostic wait times for women undergoing assessment through BAC and UC.Methods:Of the 2 147 257 women aged 50–69 years screened in the OBSP between 1 January 2002 and 31 December 2009, 155 866 (7.3%) had an abnormal mammogram. A retrospective design identified two concurrent cohorts of women diagnosed with screen-detected breast cancer at a BAC (n=4217; 47%) and UC (n=4827; 53%). Multivariable logistic regression analyses examined associations between wait times and assessment and prognostic characteristics by pathway. A two-sided 5% significance level was used.Results:Screened women with breast cancer were two times more likely to be diagnosed within 7 weeks when assessed through a BAC vs UC (OR=1.91, 95% CI=1.73–2.10). In addition, compared with UC, women assessed through a BAC were significantly more likely to have their first assessment procedure within 3 weeks of their abnormal mammogram (OR=1.25, 95% CI=1.12–1.39), ⩽3 assessment procedures (OR=1.54, 95% CI=1.41–1.69), ⩽2 assessment visits (OR=1.86, 95% CI=1.70–2.05), and ⩾2 procedures per visit (OR=1.41, 95% CI=1.28–1.55). Women diagnosed through a BAC were also more likely than those in UC to have imaging (OR=1.99, 95% CI=1.44–2.75) or a biopsy (OR=3.69, 95% CI=2.64–5.15) vs consultation only at their first assessment visit, and two times more likely to have a core or FNA biopsy than a surgical biopsy (OR=2.08, 95% CI=1.81–2.40). Having ⩽2 assessment visits was more likely to reduce time to diagnosis for women assessed through a BAC compared with UC (BAC OR=10.58, 95% CI=8.96–12.50; UC OR=4.47, 95% CI=3.94–5.07), as was having ⩽3 assessment procedures (BAC OR=4.97, 95% CI=4.26–5.79; UC OR=2.95, 95% CI=2.61–3.33). Income quintile affected wait times only in women diagnosed in UC, with those in the two highest quintiles more likely to receive a diagnosis in 7 weeks.Conclusions:Women with screen-detected breast cancer in OBSP were more likely to have shorter wait times if they were diagnosed through organised assessment. This might be as a result of women diagnosed through a BAC having more procedures per visit, procedures scheduled in shorter intervals, and imaging or biopsy on their first visit. Given the significant improvement in timeliness to diagnosis, women with abnormal mammograms should be managed through organised assessment.

Genetic assessment wait time indicators in the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program

The Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) expanded in July 2011 to screen high‐risk women aged 30–69 with annual MRI and mammography. This study evaluated wait time (WT) indicators along the genetic assessment (GA) pathway for women referred to the High Risk OBSP.

Using a disease pathway management approach to improve the quality of breast cancer care in Ontario.

109 Background: Disease Pathway Management (DPM) is used by Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) to set priorities for cancer control, plan cancer services, and improve the quality of care in Ontario by promoting standardization. The DPM approach applies a framework to examine the performance of the entire system from prevention to end of life care, and to identify any gaps within the system. In 2014, DPM began its breast cancer pathway initiative by mapping the patient journey, depicting evidence-based best practice along the breast cancer care continuum, identifying where further guidance is needed for clinical decision making, and identifying gaps in quality of care and performance measurement indicators. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of DPM on quality assessment of breast cancer care in Ontario. METHODS DPM convened a multidisciplinary breast cancer working group (WG) of 40 experts from across Ontario. The WG held 12 meetings and used guidelines developed by CCOs Program in Evidence Based Care (or other sources as needed) to generate pathways for the prevention, screening and diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up care for breast cancer. The pathways were used as a framework to review the existing inventory of provincial breast cancer quality indicators, and to identify areas where evidence based guidance is needed. The pathways were subjected to an extensive review process before publication. RESULTS The expert WG identified 28 priority areas, including opportunities to develop guidance in areas where it is lacking (e.g. role of perioperative breast MRI; indications for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy) and system barriers that may hinder optimal care (e.g. biomarker assessment). The WG also used the pathways as a framework for evaluating performance measurement indicators by mapping 48 existing quality indicators for breast cancer to the pathway. CONCLUSIONS The CCO DPM Breast Cancer pathways facilitated a province-wide, multidisciplinary process to promote quality standards, to identify gaps and overlaps in performance and quality measurement, and to recommend additional indicators more relevant to the quality of breast cancer care in Ontario.