Hildegard K. Toth

The Relationship of Mammographic Density and Age: Implications for Breast Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVE Breast density is increasingly recognized as an independent risk factor for the development of breast cancer, because it has been shown to be associated with a four- to sixfold increase in a womans risk of malignant breast disease. Increased breast density as identified on mammography is also known to decrease the diagnostic sensitivity of the examination, which is of great concern to women at increased risk for breast cancer. Dense tissue has generally been associated with younger age and premenopausal status, with the assumption that breast density gradually decreases after menopause. However, the actual proportion of older women with dense breasts is unknown. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between age and breast density, particularly focusing on postmenopausal women. MATERIALS AND METHODS All screening mammograms completed at the New York University Langone Medical Center in 2008 were retrospectively reviewed. Analysis of variance and descriptive analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between patient age and breast density. RESULTS A total of 7007 screening mammograms were performed. The median age of our cohort was 57 years. Within each subgroup categorized by decade of age, there was a normal distribution among the categories of breast density. There was a significant inverse relationship between age and breast density (p < 0.001). Seventy-four percent of patients between 40 and 49 years old had dense breasts. This percentage decreased to 57% of women in their 50s. However, 44% of women in their 60s and 36% of women in their 70s had dense breasts as characterized on their screening mammograms. CONCLUSION In general, we found an inverse relationship between patient age and mammographic breast density. However, there were outliers at the extremes of age. A meaningful proportion of young women had predominantly fatty breasts and a subset of older women had extremely dense breasts. Increased density renders mammography a less sensitive tool for early detection. Breast density should be considered when evaluating the potential benefit of extended imaging for breast cancer screening, especially for women at increased risk for the disease.

Is breast MRI helpful in the evaluation of inconclusive mammographic findings

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of MRI of the breast in cases in which mammographic or sonographic findings are inconclusive. MATERIALS AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed images from 115 MRI examinations of the breast performed from 1999 to 2005 for the indication of problem-solving for inconclusive findings on a mammogram. Forty-eight of the 115 women (41.8%) were at high risk. We discerned whether sonography or MRI was used as an adjunctive tool and correlated the findings with those in the pathology database. RESULTS The equivocal findings most frequently leading to MRI were asymmetry and architectural distortion. No suspicious MRI correlate was found in 100 of 115 cases (87%). These cases were found stable at follow-up mammography or MRI after a mean of 34 months. Fifteen enhancing masses (13%) that corresponded to the mammographic abnormality were seen on MR images. All masses identified at MRI were accurately localized for biopsy, and six malignant lesions were identified. Four of six malignant tumors were seen in one mammographic view only; two were seen on second-look ultrasound images. MRI had a sensitivity of 100% and compared with mammography had significantly higher specificity (91.7% vs 80.7%, p = 0.029), positive predictive value (40% vs 8.7%, p = 0.032), and overall accuracy (92.2% vs 78.3%, p = 0.0052). Eighteen incidental lesions (15.7%) were detected at MRI, and all were subsequently found benign. CONCLUSION We found breast MRI to be a useful adjunctive tool when findings at conventional imaging were equivocal. Strict patient selection criteria should be used because of the high frequency of incidental lesions seen on MR images.

Microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ: Clinical presentation, imaging features, pathologic findings, and outcome

OBJECTIVE The purpose of our study was to describe the clinical features, imaging characteristics, pathologic findings and outcome of microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCISM). MATERIALS AND METHODS The records of 21 women diagnosed with microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCISM) from November 1993 to September 2006 were retrospectively reviewed. The clinical presentation, imaging and histopathologic features, and clinical follow-up were reviewed. RESULTS The 21 lesions all occurred in women with a mean age of 56 years (range, 27-79 years). Clinical findings were present in ten (48%): 10 with palpable masses, four with associated nipple discharge. Mean lesion size was 21mm (range, 9-65mm). The lesion size in 62% was 15mm or smaller. Mammographic findings were calcifications only in nine (43%) and an associated or other finding in nine (43%) [mass (n=7), asymmetry (n=1), architectural distortion (n=1)]. Three lesions were mammographically occult. Sonographic findings available in 11 lesions showed a solid hypoechoic mass in 10 cases (eight irregular in shape, one round, one oval). One lesion was not seen on sonography. On histopathologic examination, all lesions were diagnosed as DCISM, with a focus of invasive carcinoma less than or equal to 1mm in diameter within an area of DCIS. Sixteen (76%) lesions were high nuclear grade, four (19%) were intermediate and one was low grade (5%). Sixteen (76%) had the presence of necrosis. Positivity for ER and PR was noted in 75% and 38%. Nodal metastasis was present in one case with axillary lymph node dissection. Mean follow-up time for 16 women was 36 months without evidence of local or systemic recurrence. One patient developed a second primary in the contralateral breast 3 years later. CONCLUSION The clinical presentation and radiologic appearance of a mass are commonly encountered in DCISM lesions (48% and 57%, respectively), irrespective of lesion size, mimicking findings seen in invasive carcinoma. Despite its potential for nodal metastasis (5% in our series), mean follow-up at 36 months was good with no evidence of local or systemic recurrence at follow-up. Knowledge of these clinical and imaging findings in DCISM lesions may alert the clinician to the possibility of microinvasion and guide appropriate management.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Practice Patterns Following 2011 FDA Approval

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES To evaluate uptake, patterns of use, and perception of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) among practicing breast radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS Institutional Review Board exemption was obtained for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant electronic survey, sent to 7023 breast radiologists identified via the Radiological Society of North America database. Respondents were asked of their geographic location and practice type. DBT users reported length of use, selection criteria, interpretive sequences, recall rate, and reading time. Radiologist satisfaction with DBT as a diagnostic tool was assessed (1-5 scale). RESULTS There were 1156 (16.5%) responders, 65.8% from the United States and 34.2% from abroad. Of these, 749 (68.6%) use DBT; 22.6% in academia, 56.5% private, and 21% other. Participants are equally likely to report use of DBT if they worked in academics versus in private practice (78.2% [169 of 216] vs 71% [423 of 596]) (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval: 0.87-1.40; P = 1.000). Of nonusers, 43% (147 of 343) plan to adopt DBT. No US regional differences in uptake were observed (P = 1.000). Although 59.3% (416 of 702) of DBT users include synthetic 2D (s2D) for interpretation, only 24.2% (170 of 702) use s2D alone. Majority (66%; 441 of 672) do not perform DBT-guided procedures. Radiologist (76.6%) (544 of 710) satisfaction with DBT as a diagnostic tool is high (score ≥ 4/5). CONCLUSIONS DBT is being adopted worldwide across all practice types, yet variations in examination indication, patient selection, utilization of s2D images, and access to DBT-guided procedures persist, highlighting the need for consensus and standardization.

Sonographically Guided Marker Placement for Confirmation of Removal of Mammographically Occult Lesions After Localization

OBJECTIVE We evaluated the benefit of placing a marker under sonographic guidance at the time of localization to aid in identifying mammographically occult lesions within the specimen at the time of surgical excision and to evaluate margin status. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed 135 sonographically guided needle localizations performed on mammographically occult lesions. Imaging during the localization procedure, marker placement, and specimen radiographs were reviewed, and the findings were correlated with the histopathologic findings. RESULTS Of the 135 mammographically occult lesions, 77 were localized without marker placement and 58 with marker placement. The 58 localizations with marker placement were for masses with a mean lesion size of 9 mm. Specimen radiography of these lesions showed a marker within the specimen in 56 cases (97%) and visualization of the lesion in only seven cases (12%). Specimen radiography of localizations without marker placement showed visualization of the lesion in 18 cases (23%). Of the 11 malignant lesions (19%) localized with marker placement, none had a positive inked margin, but five (46%) had close margins necessitating reexcision. Of the 26 malignant lesions (34%) localized without marker placement, two (8%) had a positive inked margin, and eight (31%) had close margins necessitating reexcision. CONCLUSION At needle localization of breast lesions, marker placement under sonographic guidance is beneficial because it enables immediate confirmation of accurate surgical removal of the localized lesion at surgical excision. Use of marker placement, however, does not reduce the percentage of cases with close margins necessitating reexcision.

Comparison of Analog and Digital Spot Magnified Mammography

Digital mammography has been identified as a new technology with the potential to improve the detection and further analysis of suspected breast cancer [1]. Small field CCD imaging systems are used currently for guidance of stereotaxic breast needle biopsy procedures [2]. The potential advantages of digital mammography include improved contrast sensitivity, rapid image aquisition and post-image processing [3]. We conducted an observer study to compare the technical qualities of analog and digital spot magnified images.

Delineating Extramammary Findings at Breast MR Imaging

Breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the only breast imaging modality that consistently encompasses extramammary structures in the thorax and upper abdomen. Incidental extramammary findings on breast MR images of patients with a history of breast cancer or other malignancies are significantly more likely to be malignant and may affect staging and treatment. An understanding of the frequency, distribution, and context of extramammary findings on breast MR images and a familiarity with common and uncommon sites of breast cancer metastasis inform the differential diagnosis and prompt the appropriate diagnostic next step, to differentiate benign from malignant findings. High-yield organ systems on breast MR images, as reflected by a high positive predictive value for malignancy, are correlated with known distant sites of breast cancer metastasis in the bone, lung, liver, and lymph nodes. Staging is considered when disease involves the skin and chest wall. Unusual sites of breast cancer metastasis from invasive lobular carcinoma are discussed, including the gastrointestinal tract, peritoneum, and adrenal glands. Nonmalignant clinically important findings involving the cardiovascular and gastrointestinal systems are reviewed, and potential pitfalls in diagnosis and interpretation are highlighted. A consistently systematic diagnostic approach is emphasized for identifying extramammary abnormalities on breast MR images. All things considered, the radiologist should be able to improve diagnostic sensitivity and specificity while interpreting extramammary findings on breast MR images. ©RSNA, 2017.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Directed Ultrasound Imaging of Non-Mass Enhancement in the Breast: Outcomes and Frequency of Malignancy

This study was performed to determine the frequency, predictors, and outcomes of ultrasound (US) correlates for non‐mass enhancement.

A Decade of Change: An Institutional Experience with Breast Surgery in 1995 and 2005

Introduction With the adoption of routine screening mammography, breast cancers are being diagnosed at earlier stages, with DCIS now accouting for 22.5% of all newly diagnosed breast cancers. This has been attributed to both increased breast cancer awareness and improvements in breast imaging techniques. How have these changes, including the increased use of image-guided sampling techniques, influenced the clinical practice of breast surgery? Methods The institutional pathology database was queried for all breast surgeries, including breast reconstruction, performed in 1995 and 2005. Cosmetic procedures were excluded. The results were analysed utilizing the Chi-square test. Results Surgical indications changed during 10-year study period, with an increase in preoperatively diagnosed cancers undergoing definitive surgical management. ADH, and to a lesser extent, ALH, became indications for surgical excision. Fewer surgical biopsies were performed for indeterminate abnormalities on breast imaging, due to the introduction of stereotactic large core biopsy. While the rate of benign breast biopsies remained constant, there was a higher percentage of precancerous and DCIS cases in 2005. The overall rate of mastectomy decreased from 36.8% in 1995 to 14.5% in 2005. With the increase in sentinel node procedures, the rate of ALND dropped from 18.3% to 13.7%. Accompanying the increased recognition of early-stage cancers, the rate of positive ALND also decreased, from 43.3% to 25.0%. Conclusions While the rate of benign breast biopsies has remained constant over a recent 10-year period, fewer diagnostic surgical image-guided biopsies were performed in 2005. A greater percentage of patients with breast cancer or preinvasive disease have these diagnoses determined before surgery. More preinvasive and Stage 0 cancers are undergoing surgical management. Earlier stage invasive cancers are being detected, reflected by the lower incidence of axillary nodal metastases.

Canceled MRI-guided Breast Biopsies Due to Nonvisualization: Follow-up and Outcomes

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluate breast lesion outcomes in patients after canceled MRI-guided breast biopsy due to lesion nonvisualization. MATERIALS AND METHODS Electronic medical records (January 2007-December 2014) were searched for patients with canceled magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided breast biopsies due to lesion nonvisualization. A total of 1403 MRI-detected lesions were scheduled for MRI-guided biopsy and 89 were canceled because of nonvisualization. Imaging studies and medical records were reviewed for patient demographics, lesion characteristics, and subsequent malignancy. Patients without adequate MRI follow-up imaging were excluded. Statistical analysis was employed to determine if patient demographics or lesion characteristics were predictive of lesion resolution or lesion biopsy after subsequent follow-up. RESULTS Eighty-nine (6.3% [89/1403]; 95% confidence interval, 5.2%-7.7%) biopsies in 89 women were canceled because of nonvisualization. Follow-up MRIs greater than 5.5 months were available for 60.7% (54/89) of women. In 74.1% (40/54) of these patients, the lesions completely resolved on follow-up. In 25.9% (14/54) of the patients, the lesion persisted on follow-up; 42.9% (6/14) of these patients underwent biopsy. One case (1.9% [1/54]) yielded ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion at the 6-month follow-up. No patient demographics or lesion features were associated with lesion resolution or lesion biopsy. CONCLUSIONS The majority of canceled MRI-guided biopsy lesions resolved on later follow-up; however, because of the small possibility of a missed malignancy, follow-up MRI imaging at 6 months is recommended.