A Fancellu1, R M Turner2, J M Dixon3, A Pinna1, P Cottu1, N Houssami4. 1. Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Unit of General Surgery 2, Clinica Chirurgica, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy. 2. School of Public Health and Community Medicine, The University of New South Wales, New South Wales, Australia. 3. Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Unit, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 4. Screening and Test Evaluation Programme, School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: MRI has been used increasingly in the diagnosis and management of women with invasive breast cancer. However, its usefulness in the preoperative assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains questionable. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effects of MRI on surgical treatment of DCIS by analysing studies comparing preoperative MRI with conventional preoperative assessment. METHODS: Using random-effects modelling, the proportion of women with various outcomes in the MRI versus no-MRI groups was estimated, and the odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (adjusted for study-level median age) for each model were calculated. RESULTS: Nine eligible studies were identified that included 1077 women with DCIS who had preoperative MRI and 2175 who did not. MRI significantly increased the odds of having initial mastectomy (OR 1·72, P = 0·012; adjusted OR 1·76, P = 0·010). There were no significant differences in the proportion of women with positive margins following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in the MRI and no-MRI groups (OR 0·80, P = 0·059; adjusted OR 1·10, P = 0·716), nor in the necessity of reoperation for positive margins after BCS (OR 1·06, P = 0·759; adjusted OR 1·04, P = 0·844). Overall mastectomy rates did not differ significantly according to whether or not MRI was performed (OR 1·23, P = 0·340; adjusted OR 0·97, P = 0·881). CONCLUSION: Preoperative MRI in women with DCIS is not associated with improvement in surgical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: MRI has been used increasingly in the diagnosis and management of women with invasive breast cancer. However, its usefulness in the preoperative assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains questionable. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effects of MRI on surgical treatment of DCIS by analysing studies comparing preoperative MRI with conventional preoperative assessment. METHODS: Using random-effects modelling, the proportion of women with various outcomes in the MRI versus no-MRI groups was estimated, and the odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR (adjusted for study-level median age) for each model were calculated. RESULTS: Nine eligible studies were identified that included 1077 women with DCIS who had preoperative MRI and 2175 who did not. MRI significantly increased the odds of having initial mastectomy (OR 1·72, P = 0·012; adjusted OR 1·76, P = 0·010). There were no significant differences in the proportion of women with positive margins following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in the MRI and no-MRI groups (OR 0·80, P = 0·059; adjusted OR 1·10, P = 0·716), nor in the necessity of reoperation for positive margins after BCS (OR 1·06, P = 0·759; adjusted OR 1·04, P = 0·844). Overall mastectomy rates did not differ significantly according to whether or not MRI was performed (OR 1·23, P = 0·340; adjusted OR 0·97, P = 0·881). CONCLUSION: Preoperative MRI in women with DCIS is not associated with improvement in surgical outcomes.
Authors: Tracy Onega; Julie E Weiss; Martha E Goodrich; Weiwei Zhu; Wendy B DeMartini; Karla Kerlikowske; Elissa Ozanne; Anna N A Tosteson; Louise M Henderson; Diana S M Buist; Karen J Wernli; Sally D Herschorn; Elise Hotaling; Cristina O'Donoghue; Rebecca Hubbard Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Diana L Lam; Jacob Smith; Savannah C Partridge; Adrienne Kim; Sara H Javid; Daniel S Hippe; Constance D Lehman; Janie M Lee; Habib Rahbar Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Hongying He; Jeri S Plaxco; Wei Wei; Lei Huo; Rosalind P Candelaria; Henry M Kuerer; Wei T Yang Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Alessandro Fancellu; Xue Yun Zhao; Pietrina Cottu; Valeria Sanna; Yuan Ping Li; Qin Zhu; Cinzia Tanda; Ying Yi Zhang; Yan Mei Lai; Giorgio Carlo Ginesu; Shu Qin Dai; Alberto Porcu Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2020-01-21 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Shi-Yi Wang; Jessica B Long; Brigid K Killelea; Suzanne B Evans; Kenneth B Roberts; Andrea Silber; Cary P Gross Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-06-10 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Constance D Lehman; Constantine Gatsonis; Justin Romanoff; Seema A Khan; Ruth Carlos; Lawrence J Solin; Sunil Badve; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Ralph L Corsetti; Habib Rahbar; Derrick W Spell; Kenneth B Blankstein; Linda K Han; Jennifer L Sabol; John R Bumberry; Ilana Gareen; Bradley S Snyder; Lynne I Wagner; Kathy D Miller; Joseph A Sparano; Christopher Comstock Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 31.777