Mitra Noroozian

Digital breast tomosynthesis is comparable to mammographic spot views for mass characterization.

PURPOSE To determine if digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) performs comparably to mammographic spot views (MSVs) in characterizing breast masses as benign or malignant. MATERIALS AND METHODS This IRB-approved, HIPAA-compliant reader study obtained informed consent from all subjects. Four blinded Mammography Quality Standards Act-certified academic radiologists individually evaluated DBT images and MSVs of 67 masses (30 malignant, 37 benign) in 67 women (age range, 34-88 years). Images were viewed in random order at separate counterbalanced sessions and were rated for visibility (10-point scale), likelihood of malignancy (12-point scale), and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) classification. Differences in mass visibility were analyzed by using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test. Reader performance was measured by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (A(z)) and partial area index above a sensitivity threshold of 0.90 (A(z)(0.90)) by using likelihood of malignancy ratings. Masses categorized as BI-RADS 4 or 5 were compared with histopathologic analysis to determine true-positive results for each modality. RESULTS Mean mass visibility ratings were slightly better with DBT (range, 3.2-4.4) than with MSV (range, 3.8-4.8) for all four readers, with one readers improvement achieving statistical significance (P = .001). The A(z) ranged 0.89-0.93 for DBT and 0.88-0.93 for MSV (P ≥ .23). The A(z)((0.90)) ranged 0.36-0.52 for DBT and 0.25-0.40 for MSV (P ≥ .20). The readers characterized seven additional malignant masses as BI-RADS 4 or 5 with DBT than with MSV, at a cost of five false-positive biopsy recommendations, with a mean of 1.8 true-positive (range, 0-3) and 1.3 false-positive (range, -1 to 4) assessments per reader. CONCLUSION In this small study, mass characterization in terms of visibility ratings, reader performance, and BI-RADS assessment with DBT was similar to that with MSVs. Preliminary findings suggest that MSV might not be necessary for mass characterization when performing DBT.

Factors That Impact the Duration of MRI-Guided Core Needle Biopsy

OBJECTIVE The purpose of our study was to determine which patient-related, target lesion-related, or procedure-related variables impact the duration of MRI-guided core needle breast biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Between July 11, 2006, and September 26, 2007, data were collected for 75 single-target MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy procedures using a grid-guidance technique and performed at a single institution. The following variables were studied: MRI suite occupation time, number of operators, patient age and breast size, target morphology and location, approach to target, equipment used, number of image acquisitions and times the patient was moved in and out of the closed magnet, and occurrence of complications. Statistical analysis was performed using the Students t test, analysis of variance, and Pearsons correlation, with p values < 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS The mean duration was 57.9 minutes (SD, 17.2 minutes; range, 30-109 minutes). None of the patient- or target-related variables significantly impacted the duration, although lesions located in the anterior third of the breast showed a trend to prolong the procedure (p = 0.059). The time to complete a procedure was reduced when the operating radiologist was assisted by a breast imaging fellow-in-training (p = 0.01). Increasing numbers of image acquisitions and times the patient was moved in and out of the magnet significantly lengthened the procedure duration (p = 0.0001 for both). No major complications occurred. Biopsies yielded 16% (12/75) malignant and 84% (63/75) benign diagnoses. CONCLUSION Variables that minimized procedure duration were number of image acquisitions, number of patient insertions or removals from the magnet, and assistance of a breast imaging fellow-in-training. No patient-related or target-related variables impacted procedure time.

Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Observer Performance of Clustered Microcalcification Detection on Breast Phantom Images Acquired with an Experimental System Using Variable Scan Angles, Angular Increments, and Number of Projection Views

PURPOSE To investigate the dependence of microcalcification cluster detectability on tomographic scan angle, angular increment, and number of projection views acquired at digital breast tomosynthesis ( DBT digital breast tomosynthesis ). MATERIALS AND METHODS A prototype DBT digital breast tomosynthesis system operated in step-and-shoot mode was used to image breast phantoms. Four 5-cm-thick phantoms embedded with 81 simulated microcalcification clusters of three speck sizes (subtle, medium, and obvious) were imaged by using a rhodium target and rhodium filter with 29 kV, 50 mAs, and seven acquisition protocols. Fixed angular increments were used in four protocols (denoted as scan angle, angular increment, and number of projection views, respectively: 16°, 1°, and 17; 24°, 3°, and nine; 30°, 3°, and 11; and 60°, 3°, and 21), and variable increments were used in three (40°, variable, and 13; 40°, variable, and 15; and 60°, variable, and 21). The reconstructed DBT digital breast tomosynthesis images were interpreted by six radiologists who located the microcalcification clusters and rated their conspicuity. RESULTS The mean sensitivity for detection of subtle clusters ranged from 80% (22.5 of 28) to 96% (26.8 of 28) for the seven DBT digital breast tomosynthesis protocols; the highest sensitivity was achieved with the 16°, 1°, and 17 protocol (96%), but the difference was significant only for the 60°, 3°, and 21 protocol (80%, P < .002) and did not reach significance for the other five protocols (P = .01-.15). The mean sensitivity for detection of medium and obvious clusters ranged from 97% (28.2 of 29) to 100% (24 of 24), but the differences fell short of significance (P = .08 to >.99). The conspicuity of subtle and medium clusters with the 16°, 1°, and 17 protocol was rated higher than those with other protocols; the differences were significant for subtle clusters with the 24°, 3°, and nine protocol and for medium clusters with 24°, 3°, and nine; 30°, 3°, and 11; 60°, 3° and 21; and 60°, variable, and 21 protocols (P < .002). CONCLUSION With imaging that did not include x-ray source motion or patient motion during acquisition of the projection views, narrow-angle DBT digital breast tomosynthesis provided higher sensitivity and conspicuity than wide-angle DBT digital breast tomosynthesis for subtle microcalcification clusters.

Imaging of Breast Cancer–Related Changes After Nonsurgical Therapy

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this article is to review both expected and unexpected thoracic CT manifestations of nonsurgical breast cancer treatment with multimodality imaging correlation. Specific topics include the spectrum of posttherapy changes attributed to chemotherapy and radiation therapy and the spread of breast cancer. CONCLUSION Thoracic CT is an important tool commonly used for breast cancer staging and surveillance and for diagnostic indications such as shortness of breath and chest pain. Imaging findings can be related to progression of disease or to associated conditions, such as pulmonary embolism. The hallmarks of breast cancer spread in the thorax include pulmonary nodules, enlarged lymph nodes, pleural effusions, thickening or nodularity, and sclerotic or lytic skeletal lesions. Less common findings including pulmonary lymphangitic tumor spread and pericardial metastasis. The findings also may represent the sequelae of surgery, radiation therapy, or chemotherapy for breast cancer. Knowledge of various treatment methods and their expected and unexpected CT findings is important for recognizing treatment-related abnormalities to avoid confusion with breast cancer spread and thereby minimize the risk that unnecessary further diagnostic imaging will be performed.

Characterization of Breast Masses in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammograms: An Observer Performance Study

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES This study aimed to compare Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment of lesions in two-view digital mammogram (DM) to two-view wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) without DM. MATERIALS AND METHODS With Institutional Review Board approval and written informed consent, two-view DBTs were acquired from 134 subjects and the corresponding DMs were collected retrospectively. The study included 125 subjects with 61 malignant (size: 3.9-36.9 mm, median: 13.4 mm) and 81 benign lesions (size: 4.8-43.8 mm, median: 12.0 mm), and 9 normal subjects. The cases in the two modalities were read independently by six experienced Mammography Quality Standards Act radiologists in a fully crossed counterbalanced manner. The readers were blinded to the prevalence of malignant, benign, or normal cases and were asked to assess the lesions based on the BI-RADS lexicon. The ratings were analyzed by the receiver operating characteristic methodology. RESULTS Lesion conspicuity was significantly higher (P << .0001) and fewer lesion margins were considered obscured in DBT. The mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the six readers increased significantly (P = .0001) from 0.783 (range: 0.723-0.886) for DM to 0.911 (range: 0.884-0.936) for DBT. Of the 366 ratings for malignant lesions, 343 on DBT and 278 on DM were rated as BI-RADS 4a and above. Of the 486 ratings for benign lesions, 220 on DBT and 206 on DM were rated as BI-RADS 4a and above. On average, 17.8% (65 of 366) more malignant lesions and 2.9% (14 of 486) more benign lesions would be recommended for biopsy using DBT. The inter-radiologist variability was reduced significantly. CONCLUSION With DBT alone, the BI-RADS assessment of breast lesions and inter-radiologist reliability were significantly improved compared to DM.

Use of Screening Mammography to Detect Occult Malignancy in Autologous Breast Reconstructions: A 15-year Experience

Purpose To examine how often screening mammography depicts clinically occult malignancy in breast reconstruction with autologous myocutaneous flaps (AMFs). Materials and Methods Between January 1, 2000, and July 15, 2015, the authors retrospectively identified 515 women who had undergone mammography of 618 AMFs and who had at least 1 year of clinical follow-up. Of the 618 AMFs, 485 (78.5%) were performed after mastectomy for cancer and 133 (21.5%) were performed after prophylactic mastectomy. Medical records were used to determine the frequency, histopathologic characteristics, presentation, time to recurrence, and detection modality of malignancy. Cancer detection rate (CDR), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and false-positive biopsy rate were calculated. Results An average of 6.7 screening mammograms (range, 1-16) were obtained over 15.5 years. The frequency of local-regional recurrence (LRR) was 3.9% (20 of 515 women; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2%, 5.6%); all LRRs were invasive, and none were detected in the breast mound after prophylactic mastectomy. Of the 20 women with LRR, 13 (65%) were screened annually before the diagnosis. Seven of those 13 women (54%) had clinically occult LRR, and mammography depicted five. Five of the six clinically evident recurrences (83%) were interval cancers. The median time between reconstruction and first recurrence was 4.4 years (range, 0.8-16.2 years). The CDR per AMF was 1.5 per 1000 screening mammograms (five of 3358; 95% CI: 0.18, 2.8) after mastectomy for cancer and 0 of 1000 examinations (0 of 805 mammograms; 95% CI: 0, 5) after prophylactic mastectomy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and false-positive biopsy rate were 42% (five of 12), 99.4% (4125 of 4151), 16% (five of 31), and 0.6% (26 of 4151), respectively. Conclusion The CDR of screening mammography (1.5 per 1000 screening mammograms) of the AMF after mastectomy for cancer is comparable to that for one native breast of an age-matched woman. Screening mammography adds little value after prophylactic mastectomy.

Harms of Restrictive Risk-Based Mammographic Breast Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to determine if restrictive risk-based mammographic screening could miss breast cancers that population-based screening could detect. MATERIALS AND METHODS Through a retrospective search of records at a single institution, we identified 552 screen-detected breast cancers in 533 patients. All in situ and invasive breast cancers detected at screening between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2014, were included. Medical records were reviewed for history, pathology, cancer size, nodal status, breast density, and mammographic findings. Mammograms were interpreted by one of 14 breast imaging radiologists with 3-30 years of experience, all of whom were certified according to the Mammography Quality Standards Act. Patient ages ranged from 36 to 88 years (mean, 61 years). The breast cancer risks evaluated were family history of breast cancer and dense breast tissue. Positive family history was defined as a first-degree relative with breast cancer. Dense breast parenchyma was either heterogeneously or extremely dense. RESULTS Group 1 consisted of the 76.7% (409/533) of patients who had no personal history of breast cancer. Of these patients, 75.6% (309/409) had no family history of breast cancer, and 56% (229/409) had nondense breasts. Group 2 consisted of the 16.7% (89/533) of patients who were 40-49 years old. Of these patients, 79.8% (71/89) had no family history of breast cancer, and 30.3% (27/89) had nondense breasts. Ductal carcinoma in situ made up 34.6% (191/552) of the cancers; 65.4% (361/552) were invasive. The median size of the invasive cancers was 11 mm. Of the screen-detected breast cancers, 63.8% (352/552) were minimal cancers. CONCLUSION Many screen-detected breast cancers occurred in women without dense tissue or a family history of breast cancer. Exclusive use of restrictive risk-based screening could result in delayed cancer detection for many women.

Pleomorphic Lobular Carcinoma In Situ: Imaging Features, Upgrade Rate, and Clinical Outcomes

OBJECTIVE Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ (PLCIS) is an aggressive subtype of lobular carcinoma in situ treated similarly to ductal carcinoma in situ. The purpose of this study was to determine the imaging findings, upgrade rate of PLCIS at core needle biopsy (CNB), and the treatment and outcomes of these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective single-institution study included women with PLCIS at CNB or excisional biopsy without concomitant DCIS or invasive carcinoma between January 1, 1999, and July 20, 2016. Imaging findings, detection mode, treatment, and outcomes were reviewed. Retrospective review of the images was performed. Upgrade rate to ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive carcinoma at lumpectomy was calculated. RESULTS Twenty-one patients had a finding of PLCIS at CNB (n = 16) or excisional biopsy (n = 5). Four of 15 (27%; 95% CI, 4-49%) cases of PLCIS at CNB were upgraded to DCIS (two cases) or invasive lobular cancer (two cases) at lumpectomy (one patient declined excision). No unique mammographic features were predictive of need to upgrade or extent of disease. Among the patients with pure PLCIS (not upgraded), 13 of 16 (81%) presented with fine pleomorphic calcifications on screening mammograms, 1 of 16 (6%) with distortion and calcifications, 1 of 16 (6%) with a mass, and 1 of 16 (6%) with nonmass enhancement at MRI. The median imaging size was 11 mm (mean, 14 mm; range, 3-47 mm). Twelve of 16 (75%) patients were treated with lumpectomy and 4 of 16 (25%) with mastectomy. Eight of 16 (50%) patients received adjuvant hormonal therapy, and 2 of 16 (17%) received radiation. There were no local recurrences. CONCLUSION PLCIS most commonly presented as fine pleomorphic calcifications on mammograms and had a high upgrade rate after CNB. CNB diagnosis of PLCIS requires surgical excision.