Chirag Shah1, Stuti Ahlawat, Atif Khan, Rahul D Tendulkar, David E Wazer, Shilpi S Shah, Frank Vicini. 1. *Department of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland ∥Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH †Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School and the Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ ‡Department of Radiation Oncology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA §Department of Radiation Oncology, Brown University, Providence, RI ¶Michigan Healthcare Professionals/21st Century Oncology, Farmington Hills, MI.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Breast-conserving therapy (BCT) represents a standard of care in the management of breast cancer. However, unlike mastectomy, women treated with BCT require follow-up imaging of the treated breast as well as the contralateral breast as part of posttreatment surveillance. Traditionally, surveillance has consisted of clinical exams and mammograms. However, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a breast imaging technique utilized as part of high-risk screening programs as well as part of the initial diagnosis and workup of women considered for BCT. At this time, the role of MRI as part of follow-up for women treated with BCT remains unclear. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to evaluate the role of MRI following BCT. RESULTS: Although there is no randomized evidence supporting the routine use of MRI in surveillance post-BCT, a review of the literature demonstrates that MRI (1) has increased sensitivity as compared with mammography to detect recurrences, and (2) can help evaluate mammographic abnormalities before biopsy and/or surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with higher risk of local recurrence, surveillance with MRI may represent an effective surveillance strategy though subgroups benefiting have not been identified nor has the impact on quality of life and cost been evaluated.
OBJECTIVES: Breast-conserving therapy (BCT) represents a standard of care in the management of breast cancer. However, unlike mastectomy, women treated with BCT require follow-up imaging of the treated breast as well as the contralateral breast as part of posttreatment surveillance. Traditionally, surveillance has consisted of clinical exams and mammograms. However, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a breast imaging technique utilized as part of high-risk screening programs as well as part of the initial diagnosis and workup of women considered for BCT. At this time, the role of MRI as part of follow-up for women treated with BCT remains unclear. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to evaluate the role of MRI following BCT. RESULTS: Although there is no randomized evidence supporting the routine use of MRI in surveillance post-BCT, a review of the literature demonstrates that MRI (1) has increased sensitivity as compared with mammography to detect recurrences, and (2) can help evaluate mammographic abnormalities before biopsy and/or surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with higher risk of local recurrence, surveillance with MRI may represent an effective surveillance strategy though subgroups benefiting have not been identified nor has the impact on quality of life and cost been evaluated.
Authors: Nina Ditsch; Achim Wöcke; Michael Untch; Christian Jackisch; Ute-Susann Albert; Maggie Banys-Paluchowski; Ingo Bauerfeind; Jens-Uwe Blohmer; Wilfried Budach; Peter Dall; Eva Maria Fallenberg; Peter A Fasching; Tanja N Fehm; Michael Friedrich; Bernd Gerber; Oleg Gluz; Nadia Harbeck; Jörg Heil; Jens Huober; Hans H Kreipe; David Krug; Thorsten Kühn; Sherko Kümmel; Cornelia Kolberg-Liedtke; Sibylle Loibl; Diana Lüftner; Michael Patrick Lux; Nicolai Maass; Christoph Mundhenke; Ulrike Nitz; Tjoung-Won Park-Simon; Toralf Reimer; Kerstin Rhiem; Achim Rody; Marcus Schmidt; Andreas Schneeweiss; Florian Schütz; Hans-Peter Sinn; Christine Solbach; Erich-Franz Solomayer; Elmar Stickeler; Christoph Thomssen; Isabell Witzel; Volkmar Müller; Wolfgang Janni; Marc Thill Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 2.268
Authors: Anke Christenhusz; Joost J Pouw; Frank F J Simonis; Michael Douek; Muneer Ahmed; Joost M Klaase; Anneriet E Dassen; Caroline A H Klazen; Margreet C van der Schaaf; Bernard Ten Haken; Lejla Alic Journal: Eur Radiol Exp Date: 2022-01-27
Authors: Achim Wöckel; Jasmin Festl; Tanja Stüber; Katharina Brust; Stephanie Stangl; Peter U Heuschmann; Ute-Susann Albert; Wilfried Budach; Markus Follmann; Wolfgang Janni; Ina Kopp; Rolf Kreienberg; Thorsten Kühn; Thomas Langer; Monika Nothacker; Anton Scharl; Ingrid Schreer; Hartmut Link; Jutta Engel; Tanja Fehm; Joachim Weis; Anja Welt; Anke Steckelberg; Petra Feyer; Klaus König; Andrea Hahne; Hans H Kreipe; Wolfram Trudo Knoefel; Michael Denkinger; Sara Brucker; Diana Lüftner; Christian Kubisch; Christina Gerlach; Annette Lebeau; Friederike Siedentopf; Cordula Petersen; Hans Helge Bartsch; Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Markus Hahn; Volker Hanf; Markus Müller-Schimpfle; Ulla Henscher; Renza Roncarati; Alexander Katalinic; Christoph Heitmann; Christoph Honegger; Kerstin Paradies; Vesna Bjelic-Radisic; Friedrich Degenhardt; Frederik Wenz; Oliver Rick; Dieter Hölzel; Matthias Zaiss; Gudrun Kemper; Volker Budach; Carsten Denkert; Bernd Gerber; Hans Tesch; Susanne Hirsmüller; Hans-Peter Sinn; Jürgen Dunst; Karsten Münstedt; Ulrich Bick; Eva Fallenberg; Reina Tholen; Roswita Hung; Freerk Baumann; Matthias W Beckmann; Jens Blohmer; Peter A Fasching; Michael P Lux; Nadia Harbeck; Peyman Hadji; Hans Hauner; Sylvia Heywang-Köbrunner; Jens Huober; Jutta Hübner; Christian Jackisch; Sibylle Loibl; Hans-Jürgen Lück; Gunter von Minckwitz; Volker Möbus; Volkmar Müller; Ute Nöthlings; Marcus Schmidt; Rita Schmutzler; Andreas Schneeweiss; Florian Schütz; Elmar Stickeler; Christoph Thomssen; Michael Untch; Simone Wesselmann; Arno Bücker; Mathias Krockenberger Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 2.915