Mary S. Newell

ACR Appropriateness Criteria Breast Cancer Screening

Mammography is the recommended method for breast cancer screening of women in the general population. However, mammography alone does not perform as well as mammography plus supplemental screening in high-risk women. Therefore, supplemental screening with MRI or ultrasound is recommended in selected high-risk populations. Screening breast MRI is recommended in women at high risk for breast cancer on the basis of family history or genetic predisposition. Ultrasound is an option for those high-risk women who cannot undergo MRI. Recent literature also supports the use of breast MRI in some women of intermediate risk, and ultrasound may be an option for intermediate-risk women with dense breasts. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of other imaging modalities, such as thermography, breast-specific gamma imaging, positron emission mammography, and optical imaging, for breast cancer screening. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

The impact of partial breast reconstruction using reduction techniques on postoperative cancer surveillance.

Background: Partial breast reconstruction using reduction techniques has recently increased in popularity. Some fear that combining breast conservation therapy with partial breast reconstruction alters the architecture and will affect patterns of local recurrence and make postoperative cancer surveillance more difficult. The purpose of this series was to evaluate long-term postoperative cancer surveillance. Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed the charts and mammograms of patients (n = 17; average follow-up, 6.3 years) who underwent the oncoplastic reduction technique before 2004. Mammography sensitivity was determined by measuring breast density, qualitative changes, and time until mammographic stabilization was determined. These data were compared with those of a control group from the same time period who underwent breast conservation therapy alone (n = 17; average follow-up, 5.9 years). Results: Typical mammographic findings, including architectural distortion, cysts, and calcifications, were similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in breast density scores. The oncoplastic reduction group had longer times to mammographic stabilization (21.2 versus 25.6 months, p = 0.23). There was a trend toward a greater number of postoperative mammograms and ultrasounds in the study group when indexed per follow-up year. The rate of tissue sampling in the study group was significantly higher (53 percent) than that in the control group (18 percent). Conclusions: The oncoplastic reduction technique remains safe and effective, without significantly affecting postoperative surveillance. Mammographic findings were similar to those observed in patients with breast conservation therapy alone, and sensitivity was not affected. It takes longer to achieve mammographic stability and more patients in the oncoplastic group will require additional diagnostic testing.

Dedicated Breast Computed Tomography: The Optimal Cross-Sectional Imaging Solution?

Dedicated breast computed tomography (DBCT) is a burgeoning technology that has many advantages over current breast-imaging systems. Three-dimensional visualization of the breast mitigates the limiting effects of superimposition noted with mammography. Postprocessing capabilities will allow application of advanced technologies, such as creation of maximum-intensity projection and subtraction images, and the use of both computer-aided detection and possible computer-aided diagnosis algorithms. Excellent morphologic detail and soft tissue contrast can be achieved, due in part to the isotropic image data that DBCT produces. The expected cost should be more reasonable than magnetic resonance imaging. At present, because the breast is not compressed, patients find it more comfortable than mammography. Physiologic information can be obtained when intravenous contrast material is used and/or when DBCT is combined with single photon emission-computed tomography or positron emission tomography. DBCT provides an excellent platform for multimodality systems including integration with interventional and therapeutic procedures. With a slightly altered design, the DBCT platform may also be useful for external-beam radiation with image guidance.

Stereoscopic Digital Mammography: Improved Specificity and Reduced Rate of Recall in a Prospective Clinical Trial

PURPOSE To compare stereoscopic digital mammography (DM) with standard DM for the rate of patient recall and the detection of cancer in a screening population at elevated risk for breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Starting in September 2004 and ending in December 2007, this prospective HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved screening trial, with written informed consent, recruited female patients at elevated risk for breast cancer (eg, personal history of breast cancer or breast cancer in a close relative). A total of 1298 examinations from 779 patients (mean age, 58.6 years; range, 32-91 years) comprised the analyzable data set. A paired study design was used, with each enrolled patient serving as her own control. Patients underwent both DM and stereoscopic DM examinations in a single visit, findings of which were interpreted independently by two experienced radiologists, each using a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment (BI-RADS category 0, 1, or 2). All patients determined to have one or more findings with either or both modalities were recalled for standard diagnostic evaluation. The results of 1-year follow-up or biopsy were used to determine case truth. RESULTS Compared with DM, stereoscopic DM showed significantly higher specificity (91.2% [1167 of 1279] vs 87.8% [1123 of 1279]; P = .0024) and accuracy (90.9% [1180 of 1298] vs 87.4% [1135 of 1298]; P = .0023) for detection of cancer. Sensitivity for detection of cancer was not significantly different for stereoscopic DM (68.4% [13 of 19]) compared with DM (63.2% [12 of 19], P .99). The recall rate for stereoscopic DM was 9.6% (125 of 1298) and that for DM was 12.9% (168 of 1298) (P = .0018). CONCLUSION Compared with DM, stereoscopic DM significantly improved specificity for detection of cancer, while maintaining comparable sensitivity. The recall rate was significantly reduced with stereoscopic DM compared with DM. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.12120382/-/DC1.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria Palpable Breast Masses

A palpable breast mass is one of the most common presenting features of breast carcinoma. However, the clinical features are frequently nonspecific. Imaging performed before biopsy is helpful in characterizing the nature of the mass. For women with clinically detected breast masses, the vast majority will require evaluation with ultrasound. Diagnostic mammography is the initial imaging modality of choice for women aged ≥ 40 years; ultrasound is typically necessary unless a definitively benign mass is identified as the etiology of the clinical finding. For evaluating women aged <30 years and women who are pregnant or lactating, ultrasound is used for initial evaluation. For women aged 30 to 39 years, either ultrasound or diagnostic mammography may be used for initial evaluation. MRI is rarely indicated to evaluate a clinically detected finding. Biopsy is indicated for masses with suspicious features. Short-term follow-up is a reasonable alternative to biopsy for solid masses with probably benign features suggesting fibroadenoma. Correlation between imaging and the clinical finding is essential. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

Breast Cancer Screening for Average-Risk Women: Recommendations From the ACR Commission on Breast Imaging

Breast cancer is the most common non-skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death for women in the United States. Before the introduction of widespread mammographic screening in the mid-1980s, the death rate from breast cancer in the US had remained unchanged for more than 4 decades. Since 1990, the death rate has declined by at least 38%. Much of this change is attributed to early detection with mammography. ACR breast cancer screening experts have reviewed data from RCTs, observational studies, US screening data, and other peer-reviewed literature to update our recommendations. Mammography screening has consistently been shown to significantly reduce breast cancer mortality over a variety of study designs. The ACR recommends annual mammography screening starting at age 40 for women of average risk of developing breast cancer. Our recommendation is based on maximizing proven benefits, which include a substantial reduction in breast cancer mortality afforded by regular screening and improved treatment options for those diagnosed with breast cancer. The risks associated with mammography screening are also considered to assist women in making an informed choice.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria Stage I Breast Cancer: Initial Workup and Surveillance for Local Recurrence and Distant Metastases in Asymptomatic Women

Women newly diagnosed with stage 1 breast cancer have an early-stage disease that can be effectively treated. Evidence provides little justification for performing imaging to exclude metastasis in asymptomatic women with stage I breast cancer. No differences have been found in survival or quality of life in women regardless of whether they underwent initial workup for metastatic disease. These women generally prefer intensive follow-up to detect an early recurrence. However, survival rates do not differ between women who obtain intensive screening and surveillance, with imaging and laboratory studies, and women who undergo testing only as a result of development of symptoms or findings on clinical examinations. In addition, quality of life is similar for women who undergo intensive surveillance compared with those who do not. American Society of Clinical Oncology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines state that annual mammography is the only imaging examination that should be performed to detect a localized breast recurrence in asymptomatic patients. Additional imaging may be needed if the patient has locoregional symptoms. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review by the panel include extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. When evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.

The ACR/Society of Breast Imaging Resident and Fellowship Training Curriculum for Breast Imaging, Updated

The education committees of the ACR Commission on Breast Imaging and the Society of Breast Imaging have revised the resident and fellowship training curriculum to reflect the current state of breast imaging in the United States. The original curriculum, created by the Society of Breast Imaging in 2000, had been updated only once before, in 2006. Since that time, a number of significant changes have occurred in the way mammography is acquired, how adjunctive breast imaging methods are used, and how pathology is assessed. This curricular update is meant to reflect these and other changes and to offer guidance to educators and trainees in preparing those interested in providing breast imaging services.

On the Frontline of Screening for Breast Cancer

The mainstay of screening for breast cancer is the mammogram. There are several randomized control trials that demonstrate a significant decrease in breast cancer mortality when compared to women without screening mammography included in their care. Digital mammography has improved detection in the dense breast. With the introduction of digital mammography, other novel techniques such as stereo digital mammography (SDM) and tomosynthesis can reduce recall significantly without a negative effect on cancer detection. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound added to mammography can improve cancer detection for high-risk women but can have false positive consequences.

Breast Intervention: How I Do It

Breast imaging has undergone many changes since the early years of mammography. Screening mammography is credited with contributing to the substantial decrease in breast cancer mortality through early detection. Screening mammography programs allow depiction of nonpalpable, suspicious findings requiring histologic evaluation, but most of which eventually are proved benign. Widespread acceptance of percutaneous breast biopsy techniques represents the most important practice-changing development in breast imaging. The radiologist now plays a vital role not only in the detection and evaluation of breast disease, but also in the diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Descriptions of the advantages of percutaneous breast biopsy and the techniques of performing breast intervention are the focus of this review.