Search

Rationale and Objectives: The ACR Breast Commission conducted a member survey to evaluate current practices of reporting breast arterial calcification (BAC) on mammography and to determine perceptions about the value of BAC communication and follow-up recommendations among radiologists., Materials and Methods: In September 2020, an 18-item online survey was emailed to radiologist members of the American College of Radiology (ACR). Questions included radiologist demographics, current BAC reporting practices, follow-up recommendations, and perceptions about BAC. Five-point Likert scales were used and multivariate analysis was performed., Results: Of 598 completed survey responses, up to 87% (522/598) of ACR radiologist members include BAC in mammogram reports. However, only 41% (212/522) of respondents report BAC 'always' or 'most of the time'. Radiologist factors significantly associated with BAC reporting include years in practice and fellowship training with those in practice longer more likely to report BAC (OR 1.10, 95% CI, [1.01-1.20], p = 0.023) and those with fellowship training less likely to report BAC (OR 0.63, 95% CI, [0.42-0.94], p = 0.024). When BAC is reported, 69% (360/522) simply indicate the presence of BAC, 23% (121/522) provide a subjective grading of BAC burden, and 1% (6/522) calculate a BAC score. Among the radiologists reporting BAC, 58% (301/522) make no subsequent recommendations, while the remainder recommend primary care follow-up (39%; 204/522), cardiology evaluation (13%; 68/522), and/or coronary calcium scoring CT (11%; 59/522). Overall, there was agreement from 66% (392/598) of respondents that BAC is a cardiovascular risk factor. However, there was no consensus on whether patients and/or providers should be informed about BAC or whether reporting of BAC should become a standardized practice in breast imaging. Older and more experienced radiologists are more likely to agree that BAC is a cardiovascular risk factor (p = 0.022), providers should be informed about BAC (p = 0.002 and 0.006), BAC reporting should be a standardized practice (p = 0.004 and 0.001), and feel more comfortable informing patients about BAC (p = 0.001 and 0.003)., Conclusion: Radiologists' reporting practices and perceptions regarding BAC are not homogeneous. Although many radiologists report BAC to varying degrees, it is not routinely reported or recommended for follow-up in mammogram reports. Experienced radiologists are more likely to include and value BAC in their breast imaging practice., (Copyright © 2021 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

BACKGROUND. Despite numerous published studies, management of benign papillomas without atypia remains controversial. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to determine the malignancy upgrade rate of benign papillomas, identify risk factors for upgrade, and formulate criteria for selective surgery. METHODS. This retrospective study included benign papillomas without atypia diagnosed on percutaneous biopsy between December 1, 2000, and December 31, 2019. Papillomas that did not undergo surgical excision or at least 2 years of imaging and/or clinical follow-up were excluded. Clinical, imaging, and histopathologic features were extracted from the electronic medical record. Features associated with upgrade to malignancy were identified. Multivariable logistic regression was performed. RESULTS. The study included 612 benign papillomas in 543 women (mean age, 54.5 ± 12.1 [SD] years); 466 papillomas were excised, and 146 underwent imaging or clinical surveillance. The upgrade rate to malignancy was 2.3% (14/612). Upgrade rate was associated ( p < .05) with radiology-pathology correlation (50.0% if discordant vs 2.1% if concordant), patient age (5.6% for 60 years and older vs 0.7% for younger than 60 years), presenting symptoms (6.7% if palpable mass or pathologic nipple discharge vs 1.3% if no symptoms), and lesion size (7.3% if ≥ 10 mm vs 0.6% if < 10 mm). Three of 14 upgraded papillomas were associated with four or more metachronous or concurrent peripheral papillomas. No incidental papilloma or papilloma reported as completely excised on core biopsy histopathologic analysis was upgraded. A predictive model combining radiology-pathology discordance, symptoms (palpable mass or nipple discharge), age 60 years old and older, size 10 mm or larger, and presence of four or more metachronous or concurrent peripheral papillomas achieved an AUC of 0.91, sensitivity of 79%, and spec-ificity of 89% for upgrade. Selective surgery based on presence of any of these five factors, although excluding from surgery incidental papillomas and papillomas reported as completely excised on histopathology, would have spared 294 of 612 lesions from routine excision and identified all 14 upgraded lesions. CONCLUSION. Benign nonatypical papillomas have a low malignancy upgrade rate; routine surgical excision may not be necessary. Selective excision is recommended for lesions satisfying any of the five criteria. Incidental papillomas or papillomas completely excised on histopathology may undergo imaging follow-up. CLINICAL IMPACT. The proposed criteria for selective surgery of benign papillomas on core biopsy would reduce surgeries without delaying diagnosis of malignancy.

Rationale and Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of abbreviated MRI (AB-MRI) in comparison to a full protocol MRI (FP-MRI) when evaluating common MRI abnormalities of a mass, non-mass enhancement and focus., Materials and Methods: This retrospective reader study was Institutional Review Board approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) compliant. AB-MRIs were reviewed from May 2018-December 2019 to identify women with an abnormal AB-MRI, FP-MRI within six months of the AB-MRI and an elevated risk for breast cancer. Six breast radiologists initially interpreted and recorded findings from the AB-MRI. Immediately after reviewing the AB-MRI, the same radiologists interpreted and recorded findings from the FP-MRI. Findings were recorded in an electronic data collection form. Cohen's Kappa test was used to calculate agreement. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant., Results: Of 119 patients who had an AB-MRI, our final study comprised of 32 patients who had 64 breast MRIs (32 AB-MRI and 32 FP-MRI). The amount of fibroglandular tissue for AB-MRI and FP-MRI showed excellent intra-reader agreement [Kappa: 0.89-1.00 (P < 0.0001)]. Substantial to excellent intra-reader agreement [Kappa: 0.74-0.93 (P < 0.0001)] was demonstrated for all 6 readers when identifying abnormalities seen on AB-MRI and FP-MRI. Moderate to excellent intra-reader agreement [Kappa: 0.41-0.87(P < 0.0001)] was demonstrated between the AB-MRI and FP-MRI for the final BI-RADS assessment., Conclusion: AB-MRI has acceptable intra-reader agreement with FP-MRI when characterizing common MRI abnormalities such as a mass, non-mass enhancement and focus suggesting that subsequent FP-MRI may not be needed., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The advent and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) have had a significant effect on breast cancer detection and image-guided breast procedures. DBT has been shown to improve the visualization of architectural distortions and noncalcified masses. With the incorporation of DBT imaging, biopsy of those findings seen only with DBT is feasible, and the need for localization and surgical excision to determine the pathologic diagnosis is avoided. The additional benefits of reduced procedural time, better localization, and increased technical success support the use of DBT for breast biopsy. DBT-guided biopsy can be performed with the patient prone or upright, depending on the table or unit used. Upright positioning enables improved patient comfort, particularly in patients who have restricted mobility, weight-related limitations, and/or difficulty lying prone for an extended period. Upright DBT-guided breast procedures require a cohesive team approach with overlapping radiologist and technologist responsibilities. Since this is a common breast procedure, the radiologist should be familiar with preprocedural considerations, patient preparations, and use of the biopsy equipment. The basic principles of upright DBT-guided breast biopsy are described in this comprehensive review. The various procedural components, including alternative approaches and techniques, are discussed. Tips and tricks for navigating the biopsy procedure to minimize complications, imaging examples of crucial steps, and supporting diagrams are provided. In addition, the challenges of performing upright DBT-guided biopsy, with troubleshooting techniques to ensure a successful procedure, are reviewed. © RSNA, 2021.

Objective: To investigate whether textural analysis (TA) of MRI heterogeneity may play a role in the clinical assessment and classification of breast tumors., Materials and Methods: For this retrospective study, patients with breast masses ≥1 cm on contrast-enhanced MRI were obtained in 69 women (mean age: 51 years; range 21-78 years) with 77 masses (38 benign, 39 malignant) from 2006 to 2018. The selected single slice sagittal peak post-contrast T1-weighted image was analyzed with commercially available TA software [TexRAD Ltd., UK]. Eight histogram TA parameters were evaluated at various spatial scaling factors (SSF) including mean pixel intensity, standard deviation of the pixel histogram (SD), entropy, mean of the positive pixels (MPP), skewness, kurtosis, sigma, and Tx&#95;sigma. Additional statistical tests were used to determine their predictiveness., Results: Entropy showed a significant difference between benign and malignant tumors at all textural scales (p < 0.0001) and kurtosis was significant at SSF = 0-5 (p = 0.0026-0.0241). The single best predictor was entropy at SSF = 4 with AUC = 0.80, giving a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 53%. An AUC of 0.91 was found using a model combining entropy with sigma, which yielded better performance with a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 79%., Conclusion: TA of breast masses has the potential to assist radiologists in categorizing tumors as benign or malignant on MRI. Measurements of entropy, kurtosis, and entropy combined with sigma may provide the best predictability., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess patients' preferences for receiving screening mammogram results via a video message from their radiologist versus the traditional methods., Methods: The Institutional Review Board approved this prospective study which enrolled participants from March to May 2019, after written consent was obtained. Two breast radiologists prerecorded video results for normal and abnormal screening mammograms. Women 40 years and older presenting for a screening mammogram who had a prior mammogram and no clinical symptoms were invited to participate in the study. After their mammogram, participants were assigned to obtain results via video message or by traditional methods such as a mailed letter or phone call. Participants then completed an online survey asking questions regarding the method of results delivery., Results: Around 80/94 participants ranging in age from 40 to 76 years old responded (85% response rate), of which 73% (58/80) preferred a video message from the radiologist for their mammogram results (p = 0.029). When analyzed by age, the video results were most liked by patients 40-60 years old. When analyzed by education level, participants with a Master's or Bachelor's degree liked receiving their results by video., Discussion: Our study suggests that patients in the screening mammography setting may prefer a video message from their radiologist to the traditional methods of delivery, including mailed letters and receiving results from their primary care provider. Video results could potentially be utilized in the delivery of other results of standardized medical tests as a method to offer more timely delivery of results and a personal connection., (Copyright © 2020 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to calculate the pooled upgrade rate of pure flat epithelial atypia (FEA) diagnosed at core needle biopsy (CNB)., Materials and Methods: A PubMed and Embase database search was performed in December 2019. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Study quality and publication bias were assessed. The upgrade rate of pure FEA to cancer, invasive carcinoma, and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), as well as the co-occurrence rate of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), with 95% CIs were calculated. A random effect model was used to integrate the proportions and their corresponding 95% CI. Study heterogeneity was calculated using τ 2 and I 2 ., Results: A total of 2482 cases of pure FEA across 42 studies (mean age range, 46-59 years) met inclusion criteria to be analyzed. Significant study heterogeneity was identified (τ 2 = 0.001, I 2 = 67%). The pooled upgrade rates reported for pure FEA were 5% (95% CI: 3%, 6%) for breast cancer, 1% (95% CI: 0%, 2%) for invasive carcinoma, and 2% (95% CI: 1%, 3%) for DCIS. When more than 90% of calcifications were removed at CNB, the pooled upgrade rate was 0% (95% CI: 0%, 2%). The pooled co-occurrence rate of ADH at surgical excision was 17% (95% CI: 12%, 21%). Study quality was medium to high with a risk of publication bias ( P < .01)., Conclusion: Pure FEA diagnosed at CNB should be surgically excised due to the pooled upgrade rate of 5% for breast cancer. If more than 90% of the targeted calcifications are removed by CNB for pure FEA, close imaging follow-up is recommended. Keywords: Biopsy/Needle Aspiration, Breast, Mammography Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2021., Competing Interests: Disclosures of Conflicts of Interest: R.A.W. disclosed no relevant relationships. S.J.L. disclosed no relevant relationships. M.EM. disclosed no relevant relationships. B.Z. disclosed no relevant relationships. M.C.M. Activities related to the present article: disclosed no relevant relationships. Activities not related to the present article: author is board member of the Radiological Society of North America and the American College of Radiology (ACR); author’s institution received Innovation Grant from ACR; author received royalties from Elsevier for breast textbook; author is editorial board member of Contemporary Diagnostic Radiology. Other relationships: disclosed no relevant relationships., (2021 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.)

Purpose: To determine whether MR spectroscopic assessment of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy specimens from suspicious breast lesions could be used to improve the diagnostic utility of FNA biopsies for the characterization of breast lesions., Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, a previously reported technique using high-spatial-resolution proton MR spectroscopy was modified and used to examine the utility of FNA biopsies in the evaluation of suspicious breast lesions. Tissue samples from 115 lesions (from 102 women; average age, 54 years) were excised by using FNA and core biopsies and were collected between September 7, 2012, and April 11, 2014. Histologic results from core biopsy specimens determined the lesions to be benign ( n = 55), invasive ductal carcinoma ( n = 51), invasive lobular carcinoma ( n = 5), or ductal carcinoma in situ ( n = 4). Measures of phosphocholine (PC), glycerophosphocholine, and choline relative to each other and to total creatine (tCr) were obtained from usable spectra. Planned comparisons among lesion groups were carried out using t test contrasts, and differences of each contrast level from zero were judged significant when the two-tailed P value was less than .05., Results: Of the 115 samples, 69 (60%) yielded no usable MR spectra. Analysis of the 46 with usable spectra found that only the difference in PC/tCr between benign and cancer lesions was statistically significant ( P = .028)., Conclusion: Given that 60% of FNA biopsy specimens yielded no usable spectra and that results were largely inconclusive when derived from usable spectra, the combined MR and FNA technique, as modified and implemented in this study, is of little value for detection and diagnosis of breast cancer. Keywords: Breast, MR-Spectroscopy, Neoplasms-Primary© RSNA, 2020., Competing Interests: Disclosures of Conflicts of Interest: R.A.K. disclosed no relevant relationships. J.H.L. disclosed no relevant relationships. J.A.W. disclosed no relevant relationships. J.A.D. disclosed no relevant relationships. W.J.C. Activities related to the present article: money paid to institution from an RSNA grant. Activities not related to the present article: disclosed no relevant relationships. Other relationships: disclosed no relevant relationships. M.C.M. Activities related to the present article: disclosed no relevant relationships. Activities not related to the present article: RSNA and ACR board membership, expenses reimbursed from RSNA and ACR; money paid to institution from an ACR Innovation grant; royalties from Elsevier for breast imaging textbooks. Other relationships: disclosed no relevant relationships., (2020 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.)

OBJECTIVE. The objective of this article is to define the clinical significance of asymmetric ductal ectasia by a review of literature and to describe the imaging findings. CONCLUSION. Asymmetric ductal ectasia has a significant risk for malignancy and high-risk lesions. The findings on conventional imaging may be subtle and easily overlooked. Asymmetric ductal ectasia should be included in the search pattern during image interpretation. Tissue sampling is usually warranted. Ultrasound is critical in identifying ductal abnormalities to guide biopsy.

Expected postoperative enhancement on breast MRI can appear similar to enhancement seen in recurrent or residual malignancy. Our aim was to assess the time course and patterns of enhancement at the surgical site, thereby helping to distinguish between benign and malignant postoperative enhancement. In 200 MRI scans performed in 153 patients after breast conservation treatment, 43 after surgical excision of atypia, and 4 patients after benign excisional biopsy were categorized by postoperative time interval. We defined 4 patterns of morphologic enhancement on MRI: cavity wall/seroma (Pattern I); thin linear (Pattern II); mass (Pattern III); and fat necrosis (Pattern IV). Of 200 MRI scans, 66 (33%) demonstrated enhancement at the surgical site. Enhancement typically decreased through the postoperative follow-up period. Enhancement was observed in 41% (28/68) of cases beyond the 18-month interval but was uncommon after 5 years. Pattern III enhancement was the morphologic pattern seen most commonly with malignancy (5/19 cases, 26%). When associated with delayed washout kinetics, it was even more strongly predictive of malignancy (4/5 cases, 80%). In patients with a history of excisional biopsy and no prior radiation treatment, the percentage of MRI scans showing enhancement was significantly lower than (21% vs 49% with P-value .0027) in patients who had undergone radiation. Enhancement at the surgical site occurred in one-third of cases up to 5 years after surgery, particularly in patients who underwent both radiation and surgery. Mass enhancement, particularly in conjunction with delayed washout kinetics, is most predictive of malignancy and should prompt biopsy or re-excision., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Women newly diagnosed with stage 1 breast cancer have an early-stage disease that can be effectively treated. Evidence provides little justification for performing imaging to exclude metastasis in asymptomatic women with stage I breast cancer. No differences have been found in survival or quality of life in women regardless of whether they underwent initial workup for metastatic disease. These women generally prefer intensive follow-up to detect an early recurrence. However, survival rates do not differ between women who obtain intensive screening and surveillance, with imaging and laboratory studies, and women who undergo testing only as a result of development of symptoms or findings on clinical examinations. In addition, quality of life is similar for women who undergo intensive surveillance compared with those who do not. American Society of Clinical Oncology and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines state that annual mammography is the only imaging examination that should be performed to detect a localized breast recurrence in asymptomatic patients. Additional imaging may be needed if the patient has locoregional symptoms. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 3 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review by the panel include extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. When evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Mammography is the recommended method for breast cancer screening of women in the general population. However, mammography alone does not perform as well as mammography plus supplemental screening in high-risk women. Therefore, supplemental screening with MRI or ultrasound is recommended in selected high-risk populations. Screening breast MRI is recommended in women at high risk for breast cancer on the basis of family history or genetic predisposition. Ultrasound is an option for those high-risk women who cannot undergo MRI. Recent literature also supports the use of breast MRI in some women of intermediate risk, and ultrasound may be an option for intermediate-risk women with dense breasts. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of other imaging modalities, such as thermography, breast-specific gamma imaging, positron emission mammography, and optical imaging, for breast cancer screening. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Stage I breast carcinoma is classified when an invasive breast carcinoma is ≤2 cm in diameter (T1), with no regional (axillary) lymph node metastases (N0) and no distant metastases (M0). The most common sites for metastases from breast cancer are the skeleton, lung, liver, and brain. In general, women and health care professionals prefer intensive screening and surveillance after a diagnosis of breast cancer. Screening protocols include conventional imaging such as chest radiography, bone scan, ultrasound of the liver, and MRI of brain. It is uncertain whether PET/CT will serve as a replacement for current imaging technologies. However, there are no survival or quality-of-life differences for women who undergo intensive screening and surveillance after a diagnosis of stage I breast carcinoma compared with those who do not. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A palpable breast mass is one of the most common presenting features of breast carcinoma. However, the clinical features are frequently nonspecific. Imaging performed before biopsy is helpful in characterizing the nature of the mass. For women with clinically detected breast masses, the vast majority will require evaluation with ultrasound. Diagnostic mammography is the initial imaging modality of choice for women aged ≥ 40 years; ultrasound is typically necessary unless a definitively benign mass is identified as the etiology of the clinical finding. For evaluating women aged <30 years and women who are pregnant or lactating, ultrasound is used for initial evaluation. For women aged 30 to 39 years, either ultrasound or diagnostic mammography may be used for initial evaluation. MRI is rarely indicated to evaluate a clinically detected finding. Biopsy is indicated for masses with suspicious features. Short-term follow-up is a reasonable alternative to biopsy for solid masses with probably benign features suggesting fibroadenoma. Correlation between imaging and the clinical finding is essential. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria ® are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

After benign concordant magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided breast biopsy, initial follow-up MRI at 6 months is often recommended for confirmation. This study was undertaken to determine the proper management of stable lesions on initial follow-up MRI and whether such follow-up can be safely deferred to 12 months. Retrospective review of 240 MRI-guided biopsies identified 156 benign concordant lesions. 85 eligible cases received follow-up MRI and constitute the study population. On initial follow-up MRI, 72 of 85 lesions appeared adequately sampled, 12 were stable and underwent further MRI follow-up, and 1 was benign on subsequent surgery. No cancers were diagnosed at the biopsy sites on either 6- or 12-month follow-up MRI. Among the 12 stable lesions, four were masses and eight were nonmass enhancements. One of the stable masses enlarged on 24-month follow-up MRI and proved malignant. All stable nonmass lesions were benign on long-term follow-up. After benign concordant MRI-guided breast biopsy, a stable mass has a 25% probability of malignancy in our series. Re-biopsy of such masses should be strongly considered. Stable nonmass lesions may be followed with subsequent MRI without rebiopsy. Deferral of initial follow-up MRI to 12 months may be acceptable., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

This project assessed the impact of a community-based educational program on breast cancer knowledge and screening among Buffalo (NY) immigrant and refugee females. Program participants completed language-matched pre- and post-test assessments during a single session educational program; breast cancer screening information was obtained from the mobile mammography unit to which participants were referred. Pre- and post-test knowledge scores were compared to assess changes in responses to each of the six individual knowledge items, as well as overall. Mammogram records were reviewed to identify Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) scores. The proportion of correct responses to each of the six knowledge items increased significantly on the post-program assessments; 33 % of women >40 years old completed mammograms. The findings suggest that a health education program for immigrant and refugee women, delivered in community-based settings and involving interpreters, can enhance breast cancer knowledge and lead to improvements in mammography completion.

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy in women in the United States and is second only to lung cancer as a cause of cancer death. To assist women who are at increased risk of developing breast cancer and their physicians in the application of individualized strategies to reduce breast cancer risk, NCCN has developed these guidelines for breast cancer risk reduction., (Copyright © 2015 by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.)

Purpose: To assess which patient and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging factors are associated with the likelihood of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer., Materials and Methods: The American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6667 trial was compliant with HIPAA; institutional review board approval was obtained at each site. All patients provided written informed consent. This study was a retrospective review of data from 934 women enrolled in the trial who did not have a known contralateral breast cancer at the time of surgical planning. The authors assessed age, menopausal status, index breast cancer histologic results, contralateral breast histologic results, breast density, family history, race and/or ethnicity, MR imaging Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment, and number of MR imaging lesions for association with CPM by using the Fisher exact test, exact χ(2) test, and multivariate logistic regression analyses., Results: Eighty-six of the 934 (9.2%) women underwent CPM and were more likely to be younger (mean age, 48 years [range, 27-78 years] vs mean age, 54 years [range, 25-86 years]; P < .0001), be premenopausal (55 of 86 [64%] vs 349 of 845 [41%], P < .0001), have ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in the index breast (31% [27 of 86] vs 19% [164 of 848], P = .02), have greater breast density (71 of 86 [83%] vs 572 of 848 [68%], P = .004), and have a family history of breast cancer (44 of 86 [30%] vs 150 of 488 [18%], P = .01) than those who did not undergo CPM. Distributions of race and/or ethnicity, contralateral lesion pathologic results, and number of MR imaging lesions were similar in both groups. With multivariate modeling, younger age, greater breast density, DCIS index cancer, and family history remained significant, whereas menopausal status did not. Positive MR imaging assessments were not significantly more frequent in the CPM group than in the group of women who did not undergo CPM (14 of 86 [16.3%] vs 113 of 848 [13.3%], P = .43)., Conclusion: In patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer who underwent breast MR imaging at which a contralateral breast cancer was not identified, patient factors and not breast MR imaging BI-RADS scores were chief determinants in decisions regarding CPM. Online supplemental material is available for this article., (© RSNA, 2014.)

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous tissue sampling of the breast has positively altered the management of breast lesions, both benign and malignant, since its inception in the 1980s and subsequent widespread acceptance in the 1990s. Its safety, accuracy, and cost-effectiveness have been validated in several studies. However, percutaneous biopsy serves a patient best when performed by an operator with full awareness of patient׳s salient imaging findings; a knowledge of the benefits, limitations, and technical requirements of breast ultrasound; and a thorough understanding of what constitutes an adequate and concordant pathologic specimen. This article outlines a general approach to ultrasound (US)-guided percutaneous breast biopsy and discusses indications, potential complications, and technical aspects of the procedure., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility and potential advantages of performing positron emission mammography (PEM)-guided biopsy after diagnostic PEM on the same day., Subjects and Methods: A prospective study included patients with highly suspicious breast lesions identified at mammography or ultrasound (index lesions) and requiring biopsy. Diagnostic PEM was performed with IV injection of 10 mCi of (18)F-FDG. When possible, PEM-guided biopsies were performed on both the index lesion and the additional suspicious PEM-visualized lesions using the biopsy navigation accessory. All index lesions and occult malignant lesions detected with PEM were surgically excised and correlated with biopsy results. Radiation doses to medical staff were recorded., Results: The study included 20 patients in whom 26 of 27 lesions (96%) were adequately visualized to allow PEM-guided biopsy, which was performed on 24 of the 26 lesions. Twenty-one of the 24 (88%) biopsies had concordant results: 17 malignant tumors, one high-risk lesion, and three benign lesions. Three of 24 (13%) PEM-guided biopsies had discordant results, for which ultrasound-guided biopsy was performed. Additional occult malignancy was identified in 3 of 19 breast cancer patients (16%), resulting in two wide local excisions and one mastectomy. Staff doses ranged from 0.8 to 2.0 mrem (0.008-0.02 mSv) per case., Conclusion: Same-day PEM-guided biopsy is feasible for most patients, decreases the radiation dose to both the patient and the medical staff (compared with returning for biopsy another day), and expedites the patient's preoperative staging workup for cancer.

Data support greater sensitivity of MR imaging compared with mammography and ultrasound in high-risk populations, in particular BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 carriers. Screening ultrasound improves cancer yield versus mammography alone in high-risk patients and in patients with dense breasts and is less expensive. Drawbacks include low positive predictive value, operator dependence, and significant physician time expenditure. Advances, such as refinement of automated whole-breast ultrasound, new outcomes data from ultrasound-detected masses in BI-RADS 3 and 4a categories, and development of new MR imaging sequences that allow rapid screening, potentially without use of contrast, will likely reveal the most appropriate tool over time., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Breast imaging has undergone many changes since the early years of mammography. Screening mammography is credited with contributing to the substantial decrease in breast cancer mortality through early detection. Screening mammography programs allow depiction of nonpalpable, suspicious findings requiring histologic evaluation, but most of which eventually are proved benign. Widespread acceptance of percutaneous breast biopsy techniques represents the most important practice-changing development in breast imaging. The radiologist now plays a vital role not only in the detection and evaluation of breast disease, but also in the diagnosis and management of breast cancer. Descriptions of the advantages of percutaneous breast biopsy and the techniques of performing breast intervention are the focus of this review.

Object: The relative amounts of choline (Cho), phosphocholine (PC), and glycerophosphocholine (GPC) may be sensitive indicators of breast cancer and the degree of malignancy. Here we implement some simple modifications to a previously developed (1)H NMR analysis of fine-needle-aspirate (FNA) biopsies designed to yield sufficient spectral resolution of Cho, PC, and GPC for usable relative quantitation of these metabolites., Materials and Methods: FNA biopsies of eighteen breast lesions were examined using our modified procedure for direct (1)H NMR at 400 MHz. Resonances of choline metabolites and potential interferences were fit using the computer program NUTS., Results: Quantitation of PC, GPC, and Cho relative to each other and to (phospho)creatine was obtained for eleven confirmed cases of infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Reliable results could not be obtained for the remaining cases primarily due to interference from lidocaine anesthetic., Conclusion: Some simple modifications of a previously developed (1)H NMR analysis of FNAs yielded sufficient spectral resolution of Cho, PC, and GPC to permit usable relative quantitation at 400 MHz. In 9 of the 11 quantified cases the sum of GPC and Cho exceeded 42 % of the total choline-metabolite peak area.

Mammography is the recommended method for breast cancer screening of women in the general population. However, mammography alone does not perform as well as mammography plus supplemental screening in high-risk women. Therefore, supplemental screening with MRI or ultrasound is recommended in selected high-risk populations. Screening breast MRI is recommended in women at high risk for breast cancer on the basis of family history or genetic predisposition. Ultrasound is an option for those high-risk women who cannot undergo MRI. Recent literature also supports the use of breast MRI in some women of intermediate risk, and ultrasound may be an option for intermediate-risk women with dense breasts. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of other imaging modalities, such as thermography, breast-specific gamma imaging, positron emission mammography, and optical imaging, for breast cancer screening. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The purpose of our study was to evaluate tissue sampling methods used for MRI-detected suspicious contralateral breast lesions in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6667 trial., Materials and Methods: Breast MRI was performed at 25 institutions in 969 women who had a recent diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer and negative contralateral mammography and clinical breast examinations. Biopsy was recommended for MRI findings in 135 women, and 121 underwent sampling. Frequencies and positive biopsy rates of sampling methods used for initial diagnosis and imaging guidance techniques were calculated and compared., Results: Sampling yielded 30 malignant and 91 benign results. Initial sampling used needle biopsy in 88 of 121 (72.7%) and surgical biopsy in 30 of 121 (24.8%) women. Surgical biopsy was excisional biopsy in 28 of 30 (93.3%) and mastectomy in two of 30 (6.7%). The remaining three of 121 (2.5%) women underwent mastectomy, but it was not documented whether this represented initial tissue sampling. Of imaging-guided procedures, 56 of 106 (52.8%) used MRI; 49 of 106 (46.2%), ultrasound; and one of 106 (1.0%), stereotaxis. MRI-guided sampling was with needle biopsy rather than wire-localized surgical biopsy in 33 of 56 (58.9%) women, whereas ultrasound used needle biopsy in 47 of 49 (95.9%). Positive biopsy rates of sampling methods were 20.5% for needle biopsy, 46.2% for excisional biopsy, and 0% for mastectomy., Conclusion: The majority of initial biopsies for MRI-detected contralateral breast lesions used needle biopsy rather than surgical biopsy. Contralateral surgery could have been avoided in most cases had needle biopsy been performed because most excisional biopsy and all mastectomy results were benign. MRI-guided biopsy was significantly more likely than ultrasound-guided sampling to use wire-localized surgical biopsy rather than needle biopsy.

Purpose: To evaluate the positive predictive values (PPVs) of Breast Imaging and Reporting Data Systems (BI-RADS) assessment categories for breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and to identify the BI-RADS MR imaging lesion features most predictive of cancer., Materials and Methods: This institutional review board-approved HIPAA-compliant prospective multicenter study was performed with written informed consent. Breast MR imaging studies of the contralateral breast in women with a recent diagnosis of breast cancer were prospectively evaluated. Contralateral breast MR imaging BI-RADS assessment categories, morphologic descriptors for foci, masses, non-masslike enhancement (NMLE), and kinetic features were assessed for predictive values for malignancy. PPV of each imaging characteristic of interest was estimated, and logistic regression analysis was used to examine the predictive ability of combinations of characteristics., Results: Of 969 participants, 71.3% had a BI-RADS category 1 or 2 assessment; 10.9%, a BI-RADS category 3 assessment; 10.0%, a BI-RADS category 4 or 5 assessment; and 7.7%, a BI-RADS category 0 assessment on the basis of initial MR images. Thirty-one cancers were detected with MR imaging. Overall PPV for BI-RADS category 4 and 5 lesions was 0.278, with 17 cancers in patients with a BI-RADS category 4 lesion (PPV, 0.205) and 10 cancers in patients with a BI-RADS category 5 lesion (PPV, 0.714). Of the cancers, one was a focus, 17 were masses, and 13 were NMLEs. For masses, irregular shape, irregular margins, spiculated margins, and marked internal enhancement were most predictive of malignancy. For NMLEs, ductal, clumped, and reticular or dendritic enhancement were the features most frequently seen with malignancy. Kinetic enhancement features were less predictive of malignancy than were morphologic features., Conclusion: Standardized terminology of the BI-RADS lexicon enables quantification of the likelihood of malignancy for MR imaging-detected lesions through careful evaluation of lesion features. In particular, BI-RADS assessment categories and morphologic descriptors for masses and NMLE were useful in estimating the probability of cancer., (© RSNA, 2012.)

Stage I breast carcinoma is classified when an invasive breast carcinoma is ≤2 cm in diameter (T1), with no regional (axillary) lymph node metastases (N0) and no distant metastases (M0). The most common sites for metastases from breast cancer are the skeleton, lung, liver, and brain. In general, women and health care professionals prefer intensive screening and surveillance after a diagnosis of breast cancer. Screening protocols include conventional imaging such as chest radiography, bone scan, ultrasound of the liver, and MRI of brain. It is uncertain whether PET/CT will serve as a replacement for current imaging technologies. However, there are no survival or quality-of-life differences for women who undergo intensive screening and surveillance after a diagnosis of stage I breast carcinoma compared with those who do not. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: Annual ultrasound screening may detect small, node-negative breast cancers that are not seen on mammography. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may reveal additional breast cancers missed by both mammography and ultrasound screening., Objective: To determine supplemental cancer detection yield of ultrasound and MRI in women at elevated risk for breast cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: From April 2004-February 2006, 2809 women at 21 sites with elevated cancer risk and dense breasts consented to 3 annual independent screens with mammography and ultrasound in randomized order. After 3 rounds of both screenings, 612 of 703 women who chose to undergo an MRI had complete data. The reference standard was defined as a combination of pathology (biopsy results that showed in situ or infiltrating ductal carcinoma or infiltrating lobular carcinoma in the breast or axillary lymph nodes) and 12-month follow-up., Main Outcome Measures: Cancer detection rate (yield), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV3) of biopsies performed and interval cancer rate., Results: A total of 2662 women underwent 7473 mammogram and ultrasound screenings, 110 of whom had 111 breast cancer events: 33 detected by mammography only, 32 by ultrasound only, 26 by both, and 9 by MRI after mammography plus ultrasound; 11 were not detected by any imaging screen. Among 4814 incidence screens in the second and third years combined, 75 women were diagnosed with cancer. Supplemental incidence-screening ultrasound identified 3.7 cancers per 1000 screens (95% CI, 2.1-5.8; P < .001). Sensitivity for mammography plus ultrasound was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.65-0.85); specificity, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.83-0.85); and PPV3, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.12-0.21). For mammography alone, sensitivity was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.40-0.64); specificity, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.90-0.92); and PPV3, 0.38 (95% CI, 0.28-0.49; P < .001 all comparisons). Of the MRI participants, 16 women (2.6%) had breast cancer diagnosed. The supplemental yield of MRI was 14.7 per 1000 (95% CI, 3.5-25.9; P = .004). Sensitivity for MRI and mammography plus ultrasound was 1.00 (95% CI, 0.79-1.00); specificity, 0.65 (95% CI, 0.61-0.69); and PPV3, 0.19 (95% CI, 0.11-0.29). For mammography and ultrasound, sensitivity was 0.44 (95% CI, 0.20-0.70, P = .004); specificity 0.84 (95% CI, 0.81-0.87; P < .001); and PPV3, 0.18 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.34; P = .98). The number of screens needed to detect 1 cancer was 127 (95% CI, 99-167) for mammography; 234 (95% CI, 173-345) for supplemental ultrasound; and 68 (95% CI, 39-286) for MRI after negative mammography and ultrasound results., Conclusion: The addition of screening ultrasound or MRI to mammography in women at increased risk of breast cancer resulted in not only a higher cancer detection yield but also an increase in false-positive findings., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00072501.

Background: We investigated associations of known breast cancer risk factors with breast density, a well-established and very strong predictor of breast cancer risk., Methods: This nested case-control study included breast cancer-free women, 265 with high and 860 with low breast density. Women were required to be 40-80 years old and should have a body mass index (BMI) <35 at the time of the index mammogram. Information on covariates was obtained from annual questionnaires., Results: In the overall analysis, breast density was inversely associated with BMI at mammogram (P for trend<0.001), and parity (P for trend=0.02) and positively associated with alcohol consumption (ever vs never: odds ratio 2.0, 95% confidence interval 1.4-2.8). Alcohol consumption was positively associated with density, and the association was stronger in women with a family history of breast cancer (P<0.001) and in women with hormone replacement therapy (HRT) history (P<0.001). Parity was inversely associated with density in all subsets, except premenopausal women and women without a family history. The association of parity with density was stronger in women with HRT history (P<0.001)., Conclusion: The associations of alcohol and parity with breast density appear to be in reverse direction, but stronger in women with a family history of breast cancer and women who ever used HRT.

The aim of this study was to assess levels of knowledge regarding breast cancer screening among primary care physicians in rural areas of Crete. A cross-sectional survey of 106 general practitioners and internists and 83 trainee general practitioners (GPs) employed as of October 2004 and practicing at 14 primary health centers in Crete was performed. It was a self-administered survey with 27 items exploring knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors concerning delivery of general preventive and cancer screening services. The main outcome measures were responses to four items on approaches to breast cancer screening practices. Overall response rate was 55% (primary care physicians (PCPs) = 53%; trainee GPs = 60%). Respondents demonstrated a limited awareness of international recommendations for breast cancer screening and exhibited marked variation in their responses to survey items. Agreement with current international guidelines ranged from 31% to 58% for the individual survey items. This survey revealed limited knowledge among PCPs to well-publicized breast cancer screening guidelines and variations in approaches to breast cancer early detection.

Purpose: To determine (a) how often the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 3 was used in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST), either at the time of screening mammography or after work-up, (b) how often subjects actually returned for the recommended follow-up examination, and (c) the rate and stages of any malignancies subsequently found in subjects for whom short-term interval follow-up was recommended., Materials and Methods: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at all institutions where subjects were enrolled. All subjects participating in DMIST gave informed consent and the study was HIPAA-compliant. A total of 47,599 DMIST-eligible and evaluable subjects, all of whom consented to undergo both digital and screen-film mammography, were included in this analysis. Cases referred for short-term interval follow-up based on digital, screen-film, or both imaging examinations were determined. Compliance with the recommendations and the final outcome (malignancy diagnosis at biopsy or no malignancy confirmed through follow-up) of each evaluable case were determined., Results: A total of 1114 of the 47,599 (2.34%) subjects had tumors assigned a BI-RADS 3 category and were recommended to undergo short-interval follow-up. In this study, 791 of 1114 (71%) of the subjects were compliant with the recommendation and returned for short-interval follow-up. Of the women who did not return for short-interval follow-up, 70% (226 of 323) did return for their next annual mammography. Among all subjects whose tumors were assigned a BI-RADS 3 category either at screening mammography or after additional work-up, nine of 1114 (0.81%) were found to have cancer. Of the nine biopsy-proved cancers, six were invasive cancers and three were ductal carcinoma in situ stage Tis-T1c. The invasive cancers were all less than 2 cm in size., Conclusion: In DMIST, radiologists used the BI-RADS 3 classification infrequently (2.3% of patients). Tumors assigned a BI-RADS 3 category had a low rate of malignancy. The relatively high rate of noncompliance with short-interval follow-up recommendations (323 of 1114, or 29%) supports prior recommendations that radiologists thoroughly evaluate lesions before placing them in this category.

The educational objectives for this self-assessment module are for the participant to exercise, self-assess, and improve his or her understanding of breast MRI.

Screening mammography can detect breast cancer before it becomes clinically apparent. However, the screening process identifies many false-positive findings for each cancer eventually confirmed. Additional tools are available to help differentiate spurious findings from real ones and to help determine when tissue sampling is required, when short-term follow-up will suffice, or whether the finding can be dismissed as benign. These tools include additional diagnostic mammographic views, breast ultrasound, breast MRI, and, when histologic evaluation is required, percutaneous biopsy. The imaging evaluation of a finding detected at screening mammography proceeds most efficiently, cost-effectively, and with minimization of radiation dose when approached in an evidence-based manner. The appropriateness of the above-referenced tools is presented here as they apply to a variety of findings often encountered on screening mammography; an algorithmic approach to workup of these potential scenarios is also included. The recommendations put forth represent a compilation of evidence-based data and expert opinion of the ACR Appropriateness Criteria(®) Expert Panel on Breast Imaging., (Copyright © 2010 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Lexicon was designed to standardize interpretation and reporting of breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings, ultimately improving communication between radiologists and clinicians and facilitating patient care. The lexicon includes 3 lesion types: mass, focus, and non-masslike enhancement. The mass category is analogous to the mass category in the mammography lexicon. Non-masslike enhancement is comparable with calcifications in the mammography lexicon. Unique to the MR lexicon is description of lesion enhancement. In addition, description of background enhancement allows assessment and communication of the sensitivity of the study. The Breast MR Imaging Lexicon is reviewed and images provided to illustrate these descriptor terminologies., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Women treated with therapeutic chest radiation may develop breast cancer., Purpose: To summarize breast cancer risk and breast cancer surveillance in women after chest radiation for pediatric or young adult cancer., Data Sources: Studies from MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL (1966 to December 2008)., Study Selection: Articles were selected to answer any of 3 questions: What is the incidence and excess risk for breast cancer in women after chest radiation for pediatric or young adult cancer? For these women, are the clinical characteristics of breast cancer and the outcomes after therapy different from those of women with sporadic breast cancer in the general population? What are the potential benefits and harms associated with breast cancer surveillance among women exposed to chest radiation?, Data Extraction: Three investigators independently extracted data and assessed study quality., Data Synthesis: Standardized incidence ratios ranged from 13.3 to 55.5; cumulative incidence of breast cancer by age 40 to 45 years ranged from 13% to 20%. Risk for breast cancer increased linearly with chest radiation dose. Available limited evidence suggests that the characteristics of breast cancer in these women and the outcomes after diagnosis are similar to those of women in the general population; mammography can detect breast cancer, although sensitivity is limited., Limitation: The quality of evidence for key questions 2 and 3 is limited by substantial study heterogeneity, variation in study design, and small sample size., Conclusion: Women treated with chest radiation have a substantially elevated risk for breast cancer at a young age, which does not seem to plateau. In this high-risk population, there seems to be a benefit associated with early detection. Further research is required to better define the harms and benefits of lifelong surveillance.

Purpose: To determine reasons for nonparticipation in a trial of supplemental screening with magnetic resonance (MR) imaging after mammography and ultrasonography (US)., Materials and Methods: Women(n = 2809) at elevated risk of breast cancer were enrolled in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6666 US Screening Protocol at 21 institutions. Fourteen institutions met technical and experience requirements for this institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant substudy of supplemental screening with MR imaging. Those women who had completed 0-, 12-, and 24-month screenings with mammography combined with US were considered for a single contrast material-enhanced MR examination within 8 weeks after completing the 24-month mammography-US screening. A total of 1593 women had complete MR substudy registration data: 378 of them were ineligible for the study, and 1215 had analyzable data. Reasons for nonparticipation were determined. Demographic data were compared between study participants and nonparticipants., Results: Of 1215 women with analyzable data, 703 (57.9%), with a mean age of 54.8 years, were enrolled in the MR substudy and 512 (42.1%) declined participation. Women with a 25% or greater lifetime risk of breast cancer were more likely to participate (odds ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 1.10, 2.12). Of 512 nonparticipants, 130 (25.4%) refused owing to claustrophobia; 93 (18.2%), owing to time constraints; 62 (12.1%), owing to financial concerns; 47 (9.2%), because their physician would not provide a referral and/or did not believe MR imaging was indicated; 40 (7.8%), because they were not interested; 39 (7.6%), because they were medically intolerant to MR imaging; 29 (5.7%), because they did not want to undergo intravenous injection; 27 (5.3%), owing to additional biopsy or other procedures that might be required subsequently; 21 (4.1%), owing to MR imaging scheduling constraints; 11 (2.2%), because of the travel required; seven (1.4%), owing to gadolinium-related risks or allergies; and six (1.2%), for unknown reasons., Conclusion: Of 1215 women with elevated breast cancer risk who could, according to protocol guidelines, undergo breast MR imaging, only 57.9% agreed to participate.

Objective: The objective of our study was to present the imaging features, including an MRI example, of dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans of the breast, an uncommon soft-tissue neoplasm of the breast, and review the literature., Conclusion: Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans is an extremely rare malignancy of the breast, with few published reports. This is the largest collection of such cases in a single institution with analysis of the imaging features.

Purpose: To compare radiologists' performance in detecting breast cancer when reading full-field digital mammographic (FFDM) images either displayed on monitors or printed on film., Materials and Methods: This study received investigational review board approval and was HIPAA compliant, with waiver of informed consent. A reader study was conducted in which 26 radiologists read screening FFDM images displayed on high-resolution monitors (soft-copy digital) and printed on film (hard-copy digital). Three hundred thirty-three cases were selected from the Digital Mammography Image Screening Trial screening study (n = 49,528). Of these, 117 were from patients who received a diagnosis of breast cancer within 15 months of undergoing screening mammography. The digital mammograms were displayed on mammographic workstations and printed on film according to the manufacturer's specifications. Readers read both hard-copy and soft-copy images 6 weeks apart. Each radiologist read a subset of the total images. Twenty-two readers were assigned to evaluate images from one of three FFDM systems, and four readers were assigned to evaluate images from two mammographic systems. Each radiologist assigned a malignancy score on the basis of overall impression by using a seven-point scale, where 1 = definitely not malignant and 7 = definitely malignant., Results: There were no significant differences in the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) for the primary comparison. The AUCs for soft-copy and hard-copy were 0.75 and 0.76, respectively (95% confidence interval: -0.04, 0.01; P = .36). Secondary analyses showed no significant differences in AUCs on the basis of manufacturer type, lesion type, or breast density., Conclusion: Soft-copy reading does not provide an advantage in the interpretation of digital mammograms. However, the display formats were not optimized and display software remains an evolving process, particularly for soft-copy reading.

Purpose: The frequency and outcome of breast symptoms have not been well characterized in primary care settings. To enhance and inform physician practice, this study aims to establish the proportion of visits and resultant diagnoses by age by examining longitudinal data on breast-related reasons for encounter., Methods: We used data from a prospective longitudinal sample of patients seeking care in Dutch family physician offices between 1985 and 2003 to provide routine family practice data on breast symptoms as the reason for encounter; all visits were coded using the International Classification of Primary Care. Data on breast symptom prevalence are based upon 84,285 active female patients and 367,834 total encounters., Results: Overall breast symptoms were reported in about 3% of all visits by female patients (29.7 per 1,000 active female patients per year); breast pain and breast mass were the most common breast-related complaints. Breast symptom complaints were highest among women aged 25 to 44 years (48 of 1,000) and among women aged 65 years and older (33 per 1,000). Of the women complaining of breast symptoms, 81 (3.2%) had breast cancer diagnosed. Breast mass had a markedly elevated positive likelihood ratio for breast cancer (15.04; 95% confidence interval, 11.74-19.28)., Conclusions: As expected, of patients with breast symptoms only a small subset was subsequently given a diagnosis of breast cancer (3.2%); however, the presence of a breast mass was associated with an elevated likelihood of breast cancer. These data illustrate the use of systematic data collection and classification from primary care offices to extract information regarding disease symptoms and diagnoses.

Due to the high incidence of breast cancer among US females, risk-reduction strategies are essential. Before considering approaches to breast cancer risk reduction, it is important for clinicians to complete individualized qualitative and quantitative assessments of risk for their patients in order to inform physicians' clinical decision making and management and to engage patients collaboratively in a thorough discussion of risks and benefits. This review will summarize information on potential pharmacologic, nutritional, surgical, and behavioral approaches to reducing breast cancer risk. While there is no clear evidence that specific dietary components can effectively reduce breast cancer risk, weight gain and obesity in adulthood are risk factors for the development of postmenopausal breast cancer. Alcohol consumption, even at moderate levels, increases breast cancer risk, although some of the detrimental effects may be reduced by sufficient folate intake. Women at increased risk of breast cancer can opt to reduce their breast cancer risk through the use of tamoxifen or raloxifene; other chemopreventive agents remain under investigation. Surgical approaches to risk reductions are restricted to those patients with a substantially increased risk of developing breast cancer. Patients should be encouraged to maintain a healthy lifestyle for their overall well-being and to remain up to date with recommendations for screening and surveillance.

Context: Screening ultrasound may depict small, node-negative breast cancers not seen on mammography., Objective: To compare the diagnostic yield, defined as the proportion of women with positive screen test results and positive reference standard, and performance of screening with ultrasound plus mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: From April 2004 to February 2006, 2809 women, with at least heterogeneously dense breast tissue in at least 1 quadrant, were recruited from 21 sites to undergo mammographic and physician-performed ultrasonographic examinations in randomized order by a radiologist masked to the other examination results. Reference standard was defined as a combination of pathology and 12-month follow-up and was available for 2637 (96.8%) of the 2725 eligible participants., Main Outcome Measures: Diagnostic yield, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy (assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of combined mammography plus ultrasound vs mammography alone and the positive predictive value of biopsy recommendations for mammography plus ultrasound vs mammography alone., Results: Forty participants (41 breasts) were diagnosed with cancer: 8 suspicious on both ultrasound and mammography, 12 on ultrasound alone, 12 on mammography alone, and 8 participants (9 breasts) on neither. The diagnostic yield for mammography was 7.6 per 1000 women screened (20 of 2637) and increased to 11.8 per 1000 (31 of 2637) for combined mammography plus ultrasound; the supplemental yield was 4.2 per 1000 women screened (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-7.2 per 1000; P = .003 that supplemental yield is 0). The diagnostic accuracy for mammography was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.67-0.87) and increased to 0.91 (95% CI, 0.84-0.96) for mammography plus ultrasound (P = .003 that difference is 0). Of 12 supplemental cancers detected by ultrasound alone, 11 (92%) were invasive with a median size of 10 mm (range, 5-40 mm; mean [SE], 12.6 [3.0] mm) and 8 of the 9 lesions (89%) reported had negative nodes. The positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation after full diagnostic workup was 19 of 84 for mammography (22.6%; 95% CI, 14.2%-33%), 21 of 235 for ultrasound (8.9%, 95% CI, 5.6%-13.3%), and 31 of 276 for combined mammography plus ultrasound (11.2%; 95% CI. 7.8%-15.6%)., Conclusions: Adding a single screening ultrasound to mammography will yield an additional 1.1 to 7.2 cancers per 1000 high-risk women, but it will also substantially increase the number of false positives., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00072501.

Minimally invasive breast biopsy procedures performed for suspicious imaging findings have expanded the role of breast imaging in the management of breast diseases. The first portion of this article reviews the current procedures for performing a core-needle biopsy under stereotactic, ultrasound, and MR imaging guidance. The second portion of the article addresses the management of the patient after the biopsy, including assessment for concordance of radiology and pathology findings and potential underestimation of disease.

Qualitative and quantitative approaches to risk assessment are useful for identifying women at increased risk for developing breast cancer for whom genetics consultation, individualized surveillance recommendations, or chemoprevention may be appropriate. A comprehensive medical and family history review can be used to stratify women into categories of breast cancer risk. A quantitative estimate of the probability of developing breast cancer can be determined using risk assessment tools, such as the Gail and Claus models. Women at increased risk for breast cancer may benefit from individualized approaches to breast cancer risk reduction. Prevention strategies for reducing breast cancer risk include lifestyle modifications, chemoprevention, surgical approaches, and pharmacotherapy.