BACKGROUND: The purpose of the current study was to determine the frequency of 'probably benign' interpretations at breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging screening of high-risk women and the frequency of subsequent malignancy in these women. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective review of the records of 367 asymptomatic women with normal mammograms who had a high risk of developing breast cancer and whose first breast MR imaging screening examinations occurred during a 2-year period. The number of "probably benign" interpretations was determined, and follow-up data were obtained. RESULTS: A "probably benign" interpretation was given to 89 (24%) of 367 women. Follow-up MR imaging was performed for 70 (79%) of 89 women, with a median follow-up time of 11 months (range, 1-24 months). Twenty women subsequently underwent biopsy at a median of 9 months (range, 1-18 months) after MR imaging, due to progression on follow-up MR imaging (n=14) or for other reasons (n=6). Malignancies were found in 9 women, constituting 45% of the 20 women who underwent biopsy and 10% of the 89 women with probably benign lesions. In 6 of the 9 women who developed malignant disease (7% of the 89 women in the study), the malignancy was detected by follow-up MR imaging of an area that previously was interpreted as probably benign. Tumor histology was ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in five patients and infiltrating ductal carcinoma in four. CONCLUSIONS: A "probably benign" interpretation was given to 24% of high-risk women at their first breast MR imaging screening examination. In 7-10% of women with "probably benign" interpretations, malignant disease subsequently developed in an area initially judged to be probably benign; of these malignancies, more than half were DCIS, and more than half were detected by MR imaging only. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of the current study was to determine the frequency of 'probably benign' interpretations at breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging screening of high-risk women and the frequency of subsequent malignancy in these women. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective review of the records of 367 asymptomatic women with normal mammograms who had a high risk of developing breast cancer and whose first breast MR imaging screening examinations occurred during a 2-year period. The number of "probably benign" interpretations was determined, and follow-up data were obtained. RESULTS: A "probably benign" interpretation was given to 89 (24%) of 367 women. Follow-up MR imaging was performed for 70 (79%) of 89 women, with a median follow-up time of 11 months (range, 1-24 months). Twenty women subsequently underwent biopsy at a median of 9 months (range, 1-18 months) after MR imaging, due to progression on follow-up MR imaging (n=14) or for other reasons (n=6). Malignancies were found in 9 women, constituting 45% of the 20 women who underwent biopsy and 10% of the 89 women with probably benign lesions. In 6 of the 9 women who developed malignant disease (7% of the 89 women in the study), the malignancy was detected by follow-up MR imaging of an area that previously was interpreted as probably benign. Tumor histology was ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in five patients and infiltrating ductal carcinoma in four. CONCLUSIONS: A "probably benign" interpretation was given to 24% of high-risk women at their first breast MR imaging screening examination. In 7-10% of women with "probably benign" interpretations, malignant disease subsequently developed in an area initially judged to be probably benign; of these malignancies, more than half were DCIS, and more than half were detected by MR imaging only. Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.
Authors: M D Dorrius; R M Pijnappel; M C van der Weide Jansen; L Jansen; P Kappert; M Oudkerk; P E Sijens Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-11-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Susan P Weinstein; Lucy G Hanna; Constantine Gatsonis; Mitchell D Schnall; Mark A Rosen; Constance D Lehman Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Amy Lynn Conners; Carrie B Hruska; Cindy L Tortorelli; Robert W Maxwell; Deborah J Rhodes; Judy C Boughey; Wendie A Berg Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Sylvia H Heywang-Köbrunner; Ingrid Schreer; Walter Heindel; Alexander Katalinic Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2008-08-04 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Bethany L Niell; Sara C Gavenonis; Tina Motazedi; Jessica Cott Chubiz; Elkan P Halpern; Elizabeth A Rafferty; Janie M Lee Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Derek L Nguyen; Kelly S Myers; Eniola Oluyemi; Lisa A Mullen; Babita Panigrahi; Joanna Rossi; Emily B Ambinder Journal: J Breast Imaging Date: 2022-06-28
Authors: Carla Meeuwis; Jeroen Veltman; Hester N van Hall; Roel D M Mus; Carla Boetes; Jelle O Barentsz; Ritse M Mann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-09-14 Impact factor: 5.315