Search

Purpose: This review discusses how breast centers can optimize patient experience scores among transgender patients., Findings: High patient experience scores impact patient care and compliance. Increased regulations have been enacted to ensure that health systems are effectively meeting the health concerns of sexual minorities. This will be reflected in the patient experience surveys. A leading patient survey will be assessed to help breast imaging centers optimize the transgender patient experience and question types will be provided., Summary: Breast Centers can be equipped to enhance the transgender patient experience., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Gerlach reports no conflict of interest. Dr. Leung's disclosure includes Curemetrix, Subtle Medical, and Fujifilm., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: While there are clear guidelines regarding chest wall ultrasound in the symptomatic patient, there is conflicting evidence regarding the use of ultrasound in the screening of women post-mastectomy., Objective: To assess the utility of screening chest wall ultrasound after mastectomy and to assess features of detected malignancies., Methods: This IRB approved, retrospective study evaluates screening US examinations of the chest wall after mastectomy. Asymptomatic women presenting for screening chest wall ultrasound from January 2016 through May 2017 were included. Cases of known active malignancy were excluded. All patients had at least one year of clinical or imaging follow-up. 43 exams (8.5 %) were performed with a history of contralateral malignancy, 465 exams (91.3 %) were performed with a history of ipsilateral malignancy, and one exam (0.2 %) was performed in a patient with bilateral prophylactic mastectomy., Results: During the 17-month period, there were 509 screening US in 389 mastectomy patients. 504 (99.0 %) exams were negative/benign. Five exams (1.0 %) were considered suspicious, with recommendation for biopsy, which was performed. Out of 509 exams, 3 (0.6 %) yielded benign results, while 2 (0.39 %) revealed recurrent malignancy, with a 95 % confidence interval (exact binomial) of 0.05 % to 1.41 % for screening ultrasound. Both patients who recurred had previously recurred, and both had initial cancer of lobular histology., Conclusion: Of 509 chest wall screening US exams performed in mastectomy, 2 malignancies were detected, and each patient had history of invasive lobular carcinoma and at least one prior recurrence prior to this study, suggesting benefit of screening ultrasound in these populations., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Neither I nor my immediate family members have a financial relationship with a commercial organization that may have a direct or direct interest in the content., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disproportionately affected certain vulnerable communities. The purpose of our study was to determine how COVID-19 affected the socioeconomic demographics of breast imaging patients at a major comprehensive cancer center., Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared female patients who underwent screening mammograms, diagnostic mammograms, breast ultrasound, or breast MRI during the following time periods: prepandemic (February 1, 2018, through February 29, 2020), acute pandemic (March 1, 2020, through June 30, 2020), subacute pandemic (August 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020), and chronic pandemic (January 1, 2021, through June 30, 2022). Statistics were performed using the generalized estimating equations approach., Results: A total of 74,398 female patients (mean age, 55.6 ± 12.4 years) underwent 238,776 total breast imaging examinations. For screening mammograms, Hispanics represented 27.1% (9,197 of 33,960) of patients in the prepandemic time period compared with 16.7% (604 of 3,621) in the acute pandemic time period, 18.7% (1,835 of 9,830) in the subacute pandemic time period, and 24.3% (7,492 of 30,869) in the chronic pandemic time period (all P < .0001). Self-pay patients saw similar declines for screening mammograms during the same time periods: 21.7% (7,375 of 33,960), 7.9% (286 of 3,621), 9.5% (933 of 9,830), and 17.4% (5,357 of 30,869), respectively (all P < .0001, compared with the prepandemic time period). Similarly dramatic trends were not observed for race or other imaging examinations., Discussion: At our cancer center, Hispanics and self-pay patients were disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies to improve health inequities are needed., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lack of standardized imaging recommendations among mastectomy patients has led to variability in how recurrences are detected., Objective: To describe the findings and assess the diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound in the evaluation of symptomatic post-mastectomy patients., Materials and Methods: This single institution, retrospective study included 749 consecutive diagnostic chest wall ultrasound examinations performed in mastectomy patients, from January 2016 to June 2017. Chest wall ultrasound evaluated the mastectomy bed with or without reconstruction. Electronic health records were queried for the primary breast cancer histology prior to mastectomy, clinical symptoms prompting the diagnostic ultrasound, ultrasound findings, subsequent cytology and pathology, and follow-up data. Excluded were patients with a known recurrence, asymptomatic patients, and those with <2 years of clinical or imaging follow-up. Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were performed., Results: Among the 749 ultrasounds performed, 58 malignancies were identified for a 7.7% (58/749) malignancy rate, with a median tumor size of 20 mm. Patients diagnosed with a malignancy most often presented with a palpable abnormality (79.3%, 46/58) or skin changes (13.8%, 8/58) and rarely with pain (1.7%, 1/58). Patients who underwent a biopsy yielding a benign result most often presented with a palpable abnormality (41.5%, 287/691), pain (25.6%,177/691), or postoperative swelling/suspected fluid collection (17.8%, 123/691). Diagnostic ultrasound yielded a 91.4% sensitivity (95% CI 81.0, 97.1), 96.1% specificity (95% CI 94.4, 97.4), 66.3% PPV 3 (95% CI 57.4, 74.1), and 99.3% negative predictive value (95% CI 98.3, 99.7) for cancer detection. There were 5 false negative ultrasound cases after a skin punch biopsy was performed due to clinically suspicious skin changes., Conclusions: Chest wall ultrasound has a high sensitivity and negative predictive value for detection of breast cancer recurrence in symptomatic patients after mastectomy. Skin changes remain an important clinical manifestation of a cancer recurrence., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine variability in visually assessed mammographic breast density categorization among radiologists practicing in Indonesia, the Netherlands, South Africa, and the United States., Methods: Two hundred consecutive 2-D full-field digital screening mammograms obtained from September to December 2017 were selected and retrospectively reviewed from four global locations, for a total of 800 mammograms. Three breast radiologists in each location (team) provided consensus density assessments of all 800 mammograms using BI-RADS® density categorization. Interreader agreement was compared using Gwet's AC2 with quadratic weighting across all four density categories and Gwet's AC1 for binary comparison of combined not dense versus dense categories. Variability of distribution among teams was calculated using the Stuart-Maxwell test of marginal homogeneity across all four categories and using the McNemar test for not dense versus dense categories. To compare readers from a particular country on their own 200 mammograms versus the other three teams, density distribution was calculated using conditional logistic regression., Results: For all 800 mammograms, interreader weighted agreement for distribution among four density categories was 0.86 (Gwet's AC2 with quadratic weighting; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.88), and for not dense versus dense categories, it was 0.66 (Gwet's AC1; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.70). Density distribution across four density categories was significantly different when teams were compared with one another and one team versus the other three teams combined (P < .001). Overall, all readers placed the largest number of mammograms in the scattered and heterogeneous categories., Conclusions: Although reader teams from four different global locations had almost perfect interreader agreement in BI-RADS density categorization, variability in density distribution across four categories remained statistically significant., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate how ultrasound (US), MRI, PET/CT, and CT predict extra-axillary nodal metastases., Subjects and Methods: This IRB approved, retrospective study consisted of 124 suspicious supraclavicular and 88 internal mammary (IM) nodal cases with US and at least one additional cross-sectional examination (MRI, PET/CT or CT) from a total of 1472 invasive cancers with staging nodal US between January 2016-January 2019. Imaging findings were compared with the true node status, determined by fine needle aspirate (FNA) biopsy or evidence of response to chemotherapy on follow up imaging., Results: In the supraclavicular region, US had accuracy 98.2%, consisting of 97 true positives (TP), 27 false positives (FP), and 1348 true negative (TN). 93.5% of suspicious supraclavicular nodes had FNA for a PPV 78.2%. PET/CT had accuracy 88.6% (26 TP, 5 TN and 4 false negatives (FN)). CT exams had accuracy 61.7% (42 TP, 16 TN, 7 FP, and 29 FN). In the IM region, US had accuracy 93.2% (82 TP, 1 FP, 5 FN, and 1384 TN) but only 43.2% of suspicious IM nodes had FNA for a PPV 98.8%. MRI had accuracy 100.0% (all 47 TP). PET/CT exams had accuracy 96.8% (30 TP and 1FN). CT exams had accuracy 62.7% (36 TP, 1 TN, and 22 FN)., Conclusion: US/FNA has accuracy 98.2% and 93.2% in the supraclavicular and IM regions, however only 43.2% of suspicious IM nodes are directly sampled. In these cases, MRI or PET/CT can be used to problem solve and guide treatment decisions., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Breast cancer remains the most common nonskin cancer, the second leading cause of cancer deaths, and the leading cause of premature death in US women. Mammography screening has been proven effective in reducing breast cancer deaths in women age 40 years and older. A mortality reduction of 40% is possible with regular screening. Treatment advances cannot overcome the disadvantage of being diagnosed with an advanced-stage tumor. The ACR and Society of Breast Imaging recommend annual mammography screening beginning at age 40, which provides the greatest mortality reduction, diagnosis at earlier stage, better surgical options, and more effective chemotherapy. Annual screening results in more screening-detected tumors, tumors of smaller sizes, and fewer interval cancers than longer screening intervals. Screened women in their 40s are more likely to have early-stage disease, negative lymph nodes, and smaller tumors than unscreened women. Delaying screening until age 45 or 50 will result in an unnecessary loss of life to breast cancer and adversely affects minority women in particular. Screening should continue past age 74 years, without an upper age limit unless severe comorbidities limit life expectancy. Benefits of screening should be considered along with the possibilities of recall for additional imaging and benign biopsy and the less tangible risks of anxiety and overdiagnosis. Although recall and biopsy recommendations are higher with more frequent screening, so are life-years gained and breast cancer deaths averted. Women who wish to maximize benefit will choose annual screening starting at age 40 years and will not stop screening prematurely., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To compare batch reading and interrupted interpretation for modern screening mammography., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed digital mammograms without and with tomosynthesis that were originally interpreted with batch reading or interrupted interpretation between January 2015 and June 2017. The following performance metrics were compared: recall rate (per 100 examinations), cancer detection rate (per 1,000 examinations), and positive predictive values for recall and biopsy., Results: In all, 9,832 digital mammograms were batch read, yielding a recall rate of 9.98%, cancer detection rate of 4.27, and positive predictive values for recall and biopsy of 4.40% and 35.5%, respectively. There were 49,496 digital mammograms that were read with interrupted interpretation, yielding a recall rate of 11.3%, cancer detection rate of 4.44, and positive predictive values for recall and biopsy of 3.92% and 30.1%, respectively. Of the digital mammograms with tomosynthesis, 7,075 were batch read, yielding a recall rate of 6.98%, cancer detection rate of 5.37, and positive predictive values for recall and biopsy of 7.69% and 38.0%, respectively. Of the digital mammograms with tomosynthesis, 24,380 were read with interrupted interpretation, yielding a recall rate of 8.30%, cancer detection rate of 5.41, and positive predictive values for recall and biopsy of 6.52% and 33.3%, respectively. For both digital mammograms without and with tomosynthesis, recall rates improved with batch reading compared with interrupted interpretation (P < .001), but no significant differences were seen for other metrics., Discussion: Batch reading digital mammograms without and with tomosynthesis improves recall rates while maintaining cancer detection rates and positive predictive values compared with interrupted interpretation., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Granulomatous disease may be due to multiple etiologies, including infections, inflammation, and foreign substances. A granuloma results from the accumulation of immune cells around this agent that the body recognizes as unnatural. While often nonspecific, unique clues may be ascertained with appropriate history and correlation across modalities that allow for a specific diagnosis without the need for an unnecessary biopsy., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rapidly increasing U.S. healthcare spending has been a hot topic over the past few decades. Imaging studies, including screening mammography, are possible targets for cost savings. Radiologists need to be more proactive and take charge by actively participating in the cost reduction conversation, improving the quality of care, providing patients with accurate cost estimates and educating patients along with clinicians on the value we have provided and can provide in the future., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the malignancy rate in women without a concurrent breast cancer diagnosis at presentation who underwent stereotactic biopsies of distinct sites of suspicious calcifications., Methods: This retrospective study included 280 women without a concurrent breast cancer diagnosis who underwent 587 stereotactic biopsies of two or more distinct sites of suspicious calcifications in one or both breasts at our institution from 2010 to 2015., Results: The overall malignancy rate was 27.9% (78/280, 95% CI, 22.7%-33.5%) at the patient level and 18.7% (110/587, 95% CI, 15.7%-22.1%) at the lesion level. Eighteen had invasive cancers (mean [range] diameter, 0.5 cm [0.1-1.7]; six grade I, ten grade II, two grade III), one of whom had multifocal and another bilateral malignancy. Sixty had ductal carcinoma in situ. Of the 171 with all calcifications of the same morphology, 139 (81.3%) had all calcifications in the same pathology category (benign, high-risk, or malignant)., Conclusion: The malignancy rate is substantial in women who undergo stereotactic biopsies of two or more distinct calcification sites. Given the nearly 20% rate of dissimilar histopathology between calcification sites with similar morphology, if only one site is biopsied and results in a malignant pathology, biopsy of the additional calcifications is warranted. Even if the pathology result of the one site biopsy is benign, biopsy of additional sites may perhaps still be necessary., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To study the impact of second-opinion interpretation of breast imaging studies submitted from outside facilities to a tertiary cancer center., Materials and Methods: A retrospective database review was conducted of second-opinion interpretations rendered at our institution from January 1, 2010, to June 30, 2014, on studies from patients who did not have a concurrent breast cancer diagnosis. A total of 2,253 patients were included., Results: In 800 of 2,253 patients (35.5%), the BI-RADS categories assigned at our institution and at outside facilities were discordant. Of 973 patients assigned BI-RADS category 4 or 5 at outside facilities, 278 (28.6%) were assigned BI-RADS category 1 to 3 (no biopsy necessary) at our institution. Of 923 patients assigned BI-RADS category 1 to 3 at outside facilities, 191 (20.7%) were assigned BI-RADS category 4 or 5 at our institution, and 189 of these had biopsies, which revealed 23 cancers, 15 high-risk lesions, and 151 benign lesions. One high-risk lesion at core biopsy was upgraded to invasive ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on excision, resulting in 24 cancers. Of these, 18 reflected true additional breast cancers detected as a result of second-opinion interpretation: 12 invasive carcinomas and 6 cases of DCIS. These results translate into a 9.4% (18/191) positive predictive value for the number of cancers diagnosed among all biopsies recommended and a 9.5% (18/189) positive predictive value for the number of cancers diagnosed among all biopsies recommended and actually performed., Conclusions: These findings demonstrate the positive clinical impact of second-opinion interpretation at a tertiary cancer center of outside-facility breast imaging studies in patients without a breast cancer diagnosis., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)