Literature DB >> 31760277

Assessment of MRI-detected lesions on screening tomosynthesis in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.

Sadia Choudhery1, Eric Polley2, Amy Lynn Conners3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the presence of screening digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) correlates for suspicious lesions detected on pre-operative staging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.
METHODS: After approval from the institutional review board (IRB), screening DBTs on breast cancer patients with BI-RADS 4 or 5 staging MRI exams between 8/1/17 and 8/1/18 were assessed for presence of DBT correlates for suspicious MRI findings. The pathology of the index lesion, type of additional MRI finding (mass, non-mass enhancement, or focus), correlative finding on tomosynthesis (mass, asymmetry/focal asymmetry, distortion, or calcifications), size on MRI and tomosynthesis, breast density, and pathology of the additional lesion were recorded. The chi-square test of association was used unless otherwise specified. Confidence intervals for proportions were estimated using the Wilson's score method.
RESULTS: 17/70 (24%) of additional lesions seen on pre-operative MRI exams in patients with newly diagnosed cancer had a mammographic correlate on corresponding screening DBT. There was no significant relationship between the presence of a mammographic correlate and the type of MRI finding (mass, NME, or focus), breast density, size of lesion, pathology of index cancer, or pathology of the additional lesion (p≥ 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: 76% of additional lesions seen on pre-operative staging MRI in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer are not seen retrospectively on screening DBT. Since about 24% of MRI-detected additional lesions may have a DBT correlate, DBT exams should be reviewed in patients recalled for further workup of findings seen on pre-operative MRI since this may facilitate DBT-guided biopsy of suspicious lesions, which is preferable to MRI-guided biopsy for cost and patient comfort reasons.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast; Cancer; MRI; Screening; Tomosynthesis

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31760277      PMCID: PMC6920563          DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.09.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Imaging        ISSN: 0899-7071            Impact factor:   1.605


  22 in total

1.  Local Tumor Staging of Breast Cancer: Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis.

Authors:  Marion Fontaine; Christophe Tourasse; Emmanuelle Pages; Nicolas Laurent; Guillaume Laffargue; Ingrid Millet; Nicolas Molinari; Patrice Taourel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Assessment of disease extent on contrast-enhanced MRI in breast cancer detected at digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography alone.

Authors:  A V Chudgar; E F Conant; S P Weinstein; B M Keller; M Synnestvedt; P Yamartino; E S McDonald
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2017-03-17       Impact factor: 2.350

3.  Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) to Characterize MRI-Detected Additional Lesions Unidentified at Targeted Ultrasound in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Giovanna Mariscotti; Nehmat Houssami; Manuela Durando; Pier Paolo Campanino; Elisa Regini; Alberto Fornari; Riccardo Bussone; Isabella Castellano; Anna Sapino; Paolo Fonio; Giovanni Gandini
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program.

Authors:  Per Skaane; Andriy I Bandos; Randi Gullien; Ellen B Eben; Ulrika Ekseth; Unni Haakenaasen; Mina Izadi; Ingvild N Jebsen; Gunnar Jahr; Mona Krager; Loren T Niklason; Solveig Hofvind; David Gur
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Comparison of the diagnostic performance of digital breast tomosynthesis and magnetic resonance imaging added to digital mammography in women with known breast cancers.

Authors:  Won Hwa Kim; Jung Min Chang; Hyeong-Gon Moon; Ann Yi; Hye Ryoung Koo; Hye Mi Gweon; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-09-16       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS).

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

Review 7.  Indications for breast MRI in the patient with newly diagnosed breast cancer.

Authors:  Constance D Lehman; Wendy DeMartini; Benjamin O Anderson; Stephen B Edge
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 11.908

8.  Influence of preoperative MRI on the surgical management of patients with operable breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael Braun; Martin Pölcher; Simone Schrading; Oliver Zivanovic; Theresa Kowalski; Uta Flucke; Claudia Leutner; Tong-Wong Park-Simon; Christian Rudlowski; Walther Kuhn; Christiane K Kuhl
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-09-29       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Increased Cancer Detection Rate and Variations in the Recall Rate Resulting from Implementation of 3D Digital Breast Tomosynthesis into a Population-based Screening Program.

Authors:  Richard E Sharpe; Shambavi Venkataraman; Jordana Phillips; Vandana Dialani; Valerie J Fein-Zachary; Seema Prakash; Priscilla J Slanetz; Tejas S Mehta
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 10.  Diagnostic Performance of Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Non-Calcified Equivocal Breast Findings: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Barbara Bennani-Baiti; Nabila Bennani-Baiti; Pascal A Baltzer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.