BACKGROUND: The benefit of breast MRI for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients is uncertain. This study characterizes those receiving MRI versus those who did not, and reports on their short-term surgical outcomes, including time to operation, margin status, and mastectomy rate. STUDY DESIGN: All patients seen in a multidisciplinary breast cancer clinic from July 2004 to December 2006 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were evaluated by a radiologist, a pathologist, and surgical, radiation, and medical oncologists. RESULTS: Among 577 patients, 130 had pretreatment MRIs. MRI use increased from 2004 (referent, 13%) versus 2005 (24%, p=0.014) and 2006 (27%, p=0.002). Patients having MRIs were younger (52.5 versus 59.0 years, p < 0.001), but its use was not associated with preoperative chemotherapy, family history of breast or ovarian cancer, presentation, or tumor features. MRI was associated with a 22.4-day delay in pretreatment evaluation (p=0.011). Breast conserving therapy (BCT) was attempted in 320 of 419 patients with complete surgical data. The odds ratio for mastectomy, controlling for T size and stage, was 1.80 after MRI versus no MRI (p=0.024). Patients having MRIs did not have fewer positive margins at lumpectomy (21.6% MRI versus 13.8% no MRI, p=0.20), or conversions from BCT to mastectomy (9.8% MRI versus 5.9% no MRI, p=0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Breast MRI use was not confined to any particular patient group. MRI use was not associated with improved margin status or BCT attempts, but was associated with a treatment delay and increased mastectomy rate. Without evidence of improved oncologic outcomes as a result, our study does not support the routine use of MRI to select patients or facilitate the performance of BCT.
BACKGROUND: The benefit of breast MRI for newly diagnosed breast cancerpatients is uncertain. This study characterizes those receiving MRI versus those who did not, and reports on their short-term surgical outcomes, including time to operation, margin status, and mastectomy rate. STUDY DESIGN: All patients seen in a multidisciplinary breast cancer clinic from July 2004 to December 2006 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were evaluated by a radiologist, a pathologist, and surgical, radiation, and medical oncologists. RESULTS: Among 577 patients, 130 had pretreatment MRIs. MRI use increased from 2004 (referent, 13%) versus 2005 (24%, p=0.014) and 2006 (27%, p=0.002). Patients having MRIs were younger (52.5 versus 59.0 years, p < 0.001), but its use was not associated with preoperative chemotherapy, family history of breast or ovarian cancer, presentation, or tumor features. MRI was associated with a 22.4-day delay in pretreatment evaluation (p=0.011). Breast conserving therapy (BCT) was attempted in 320 of 419 patients with complete surgical data. The odds ratio for mastectomy, controlling for T size and stage, was 1.80 after MRI versus no MRI (p=0.024). Patients having MRIs did not have fewer positive margins at lumpectomy (21.6% MRI versus 13.8% no MRI, p=0.20), or conversions from BCT to mastectomy (9.8% MRI versus 5.9% no MRI, p=0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Breast MRI use was not confined to any particular patient group. MRI use was not associated with improved margin status or BCT attempts, but was associated with a treatment delay and increased mastectomy rate. Without evidence of improved oncologic outcomes as a result, our study does not support the routine use of MRI to select patients or facilitate the performance of BCT.
Authors: Eline E Deurloo; Johannes L Peterse; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Albert P E Besnard; Sara H Muller; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: M Clarke; R Collins; S Darby; C Davies; P Elphinstone; V Evans; J Godwin; R Gray; C Hicks; S James; E MacKinnon; P McGale; T McHugh; R Peto; C Taylor; Y Wang Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: M O Leach; C R M Boggis; A K Dixon; D F Easton; R A Eeles; D G R Evans; F J Gilbert; I Griebsch; R J C Hoff; P Kessar; S R Lakhani; S M Moss; A Nerurkar; A R Padhani; L J Pointon; D Thompson; R M L Warren Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 May 21-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Wendie A Berg; Lorena Gutierrez; Moriel S NessAiver; W Bradford Carter; Mythreyi Bhargavan; Rebecca S Lewis; Olga B Ioffe Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-10-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Isabelle Bedrosian; Rosemarie Mick; Susan G Orel; Mitchell Schnall; Carol Reynolds; Francis R Spitz; Linda S Callans; Gordon P Buzby; Ernest F Rosato; Douglas L Fraker; Brian J Czerniecki Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Wendie A Berg; Kathleen S Madsen; Kathy Schilling; Marie Tartar; Etta D Pisano; Linda Hovanessian Larsen; Deepa Narayanan; Al Ozonoff; Joel P Miller; Judith E Kalinyak Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-11-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jamie L Wagner; Carla L Warneke; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Isabelle Bedrosian; Gildy V Babiera; Henry M Kuerer; Kelly K Hunt; Wei Yang; Aysegul A Sahin; Funda Meric-Bernstam Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Heather Spencer Feigelson; Ted A James; Richard M Single; Adedayo A Onitilo; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Tom Barney; Jordan E Bakerman; Laurence E McCahill Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2013-03-13 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Louise M Henderson; Julie Weiss; Rebecca A Hubbard; Cristina O'Donoghue; Wendy B DeMartini; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Martha Goodrich; Beth Virnig; Anna N A Tosteson; Constance D Lehman; Tracy Onega Journal: Breast J Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Maxine S Jochelson; D David Dershaw; Janice S Sung; Alexandra S Heerdt; Cynthia Thornton; Chaya S Moskowitz; Jessica Ferrara; Elizabeth A Morris Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-12-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kari B Wisinski; Adrienne Faerber; Stephanie Wagner; Thomas C Havighurst; Jane A McElroy; Kyungmann Kim; Howard H Bailey Journal: Clin Med Res Date: 2013-04-11