Real-time reading in mammography breast screening.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to assess the role of real-time reading in the mammography screening programme carried out at the Hospital of Marzana, Verona, Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During the 5-year period 1999-2004, 54,472 women attended the screening programme (32,291 first calls: unadjusted uptake 41.4%, adjusted uptake 50.3%; 21,551 2- year routine recalls: unadjusted uptake 86.4%, adjusted uptake 89.9%). Further diagnostic investigations [(FDI), imaging and cytohistological] were performed immediately after real-time reading of the screening mammograms (FDI rate among first calls 10.9%; FDI rate among 2-year recalls 5.4%). Overall, cytohistological FDI were requested in 27% of imaging FDI, with a clear prevalence of cytological [fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) 87%] over histological procedures [core needle biopsy (CNB) 11%; vacuum aspiration biopsy (VAB) 2%]. RESULTS: Imaging FDI proved to be conclusive in 73%. Cytohistological FDI led to the use of surgical biopsy (SB) in 39.5% (ratio between benign and malignant SB: 0.19/first calls, 0.14/2-year recalls). There were a total of 427 screen-detected breast cancers (BC), with a very good breast cancer detection rate (BCDR/first calls 9.7 per thousand; BCDR/2-year recalls 5.1 per thousand). In the 427 screen-detected BC, the incidence of pTis, pT1a,b cancers was 59.6% (diagnostic anticipation); the incidence of pN0 cancers was 61.2%; the incidence of conservative surgical procedures was 78.6%. In interval cancers, the false negative rate was 8.3% only, whereas the proportional incidence was very low indeed (14% first year; 38% second year). CONCLUSIONS: The high sensitivity exhibited by the Marzana mammography screening programme suggests that the value of real-time reading should be validated by other programmes adopting a similar approach.

Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience).

The inter- and intraobserver agreement (K statistic) in reporting according to BI-RADS assessment categories was tested on 12 dedicated breast radiologists, with little prior working knowledge of BI-RADS, reading a set of 50 lesions (29 malignant, 21 benign). Intraobserver agreement (four categories: R2, R3, R4, R5) was fair (0.21-0.40), moderate (0.41-0.60), substantial (0.61-0.80) or almost perfect (>0.80) for one, two, five or four radiologists, or (six categories: R2, R3, R4a, R4b, R4c, R5) fair, moderate, substantial or almost perfect for three, three, three or three radiologists, respectively. Interobserver agreement (four categories) was fair, moderate or substantial for three, six, or three radiologists, or (six categories) slight, fair or moderate for one, six, or five radiologists. Major disagreement occurred for intermediate categories (R3=0.12, R4=0.25, R4a=0.08, R4b=0.07, R4c=0.10). We found insufficient intra- and interobserver consistency of breast radiologists in reporting BI-RADS assessment categories. Although training may improve these results, simpler alternative reporting methods (systems), focused on clinical decision-making, should be explored.

A methodology to evaluate differential costs of full field digital as compared to conventional screen film mammography in a clinical setting.

PURPOSE: The use of full field digital mammography (FFDM) in alternative to conventional screen film mammography (SFM) in the current practice is delayed by the high costs of FFDM. The present study, performed at the Centro per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica of Florence, using both FFDM and SFM, was aimed at estimating the impact of introducing the new FFDM technique on overall mammography costs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We estimated the differential costs of both methods, based on real expenditures, as provided by the administrative department, and on radiologists, radiographers and other staff's working time. Two different workload scenarios (5000 and 10,000 tests/year per mammography equipment) were considered. Common costs of both techniques were censored for study purpose. RESULTS: Beside a higher cost due to purchase and hire/leasing costs of equipment, FFDM implies a greater workload for radiologists (reading time almost doubled). SFM implies a greater workload for the administrative staff to run the archive and for loading/unloading films of the roller viewer, whereas no different workload has been observed for radiographers. Overall FFDM costs 24.22-26.46 for examination more than SFM for the 5000 tests scenario and 9.91-12.15 more for the 10,000 tests scenario. DISCUSSION: Although present study estimates cannot easily be generalised to any local setting, the model for cost calculation is easy to be exported to another scenario by applying different local parameters. The advantages made available by FFDM (computerised data recording, tele-transmission, tele-reporting, tele-consulting, automatic display on monitor of previous exams and use of CAD) may justify the higher cost, but a limited reduction in purchase and assistance costs could easily allow a turnover, with FFDM being more convenient than SFM even on the cost side.

Categorizing breast mammographic density: intra- and interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories.

The inter- and intraobserver agreement (kappa-statistic) in reporting according to Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS((R))) breast density categories was tested in 12 dedicated breast radiologists reading a digitized set of 100 two-view mammograms. Average intraobserver agreement was substantial (kappa=0.71, range 0.32-0.88) on a four-grade scale (D1/D2/D3/D4) and almost perfect (kappa=0.81, range 0.62-1.00) on a two-grade scale (D1-2/D3-4). Average interobserver agreement was moderate (kappa=0.54, range 0.02-0.77) on a four-grade scale and substantial (kappa=0.71, range 0.31-0.88) on a two-grade scale. Major disagreement was found for intermediate categories (D2=0.25, D3=0.28). Categorization of breast density according to BI-RADS is feasible and consistency is good within readers and reasonable between readers. Interobserver inconsistency does occur, and checking the adoption of proper criteria through a proficiency test and appropriate training might be useful. As inconsistency is probably due to erroneous perception of classification criteria, standard sets of reference images should be made available for training.

Pre-operative prediction of invasive vs intraductal breast cancer type: multivariate analysis of the accuracy of clinical and imaging findings.

Two consecutive series of 107 invasive carcinomas and 108 carcinomas in situ of the breast were considered retrospectively. The main symptomatic, clinical and cytological features were retrieved from clinical records, whereas the features at mammography and/or ultrasonography were reclassified at a blinded review by an expert radiologist. The power of predicting invasion on the basis of these features was then evaluated. The accuracy of such a prediction was compared to that of a mathematical model using the same diagnostic features by multivariate logistic regression analysis. Neither approach reached a satisfactory accuracy, but the radiologist's judgment (sensitivity 97.1%, specificity 81.9%, positive predictive value 98.4%, negative predictive value 71.6%, overall accuracy 95.8%) was slightly superior to the mathematical model (sensitivity 93.2%, specificity 87.9% positive predictive value 98.8%, negative predictive value 53.7%, overall accuracy 92.8%). Although some presentations are significantly associated with invasive or in situ status, diagnostic features alone are not sufficiently accurate to bypass histological confirmation, although they might give useful clinical indications.

The cytopathology of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. A detailed analysis of fine needle aspiration cytology of 58 cases compared with 101 invasive ductal carcinomas.

Bonzanini M., Gilioli E., Brancato B., Cristofori A., Bricolo D., Natale N., Valentini A., and Dalla Palma P. (2001)Cytopathology 12, 107-119. The cytopathology of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. A detailed analysis of fine needle aspiration cytology of 58 cases compared with 101 invasive ductal carcinomas. The existence of cytological findings that discriminate ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast from invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) has not been unanimously accepted and the role of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) remains controversial. We report the cytological findings of a large series of FNAC from histologically proven DCIS compared with those of ductal carcinomas having a different extent of the invasive component. The association of high cohesiveness of atypical cells and absence of tubular aggregates showed good sensitivity (SE) and specificity (SP) for the diagnosis of DCIS vs IDC. The simultaneous presence of necrotic background, atypical cells with abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm and a low percentage of single malignant cells resulted in low sensitivity but high specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) for differential cytological diagnosis of DCIS vs IDC.

[The assessment of the impact of a double reading by expert readers in a mass mammographic study]. / Valutazione dell'impatto della doppia lettura da parte di lettori esperti in un'indagine mammografica di massa.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of double reading of screening mammograms by expert radiologists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analyzed the results of independent readings of a proficiency test of screening mammography (140 cases, 32 cancers) performed by four expert radiologists. Double reading was simulated by matching the four original readings in 6 possible combinations. The impact of double reading over single reading was evaluated in terms of increased sensitivity and increased recall rate. RESULTS: Of 32 carcinomas 22, 6, or 4 were identified by 4, 3, or 2 readers, respectively. Of 108 cases negative for cancer a recall for further investigations was suggested by 4, 3, 2, 1 or no reader(s) in 3, 3, 9, 14, or 79 cases, respectively. Inter-reader diagnostic repeatability was good (k = 0.65). Single readers achieved an average sensitivity of 89% (range 87.5-90.6%) and an average recall rate of 12.2% (range 7.4-16.6%). Simulated double reading achieved an average increase in sensitivity of 8.8% (range 6.2-10.95%) and an average increase of recall rate of 6.2% (range 3.8-8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Even though the relative increase of recall rate is relevant (+53.2%), the corresponding gain in sensitivity justifies the use of double reading, which was confirmed to be worthwhile also when expert radiologists are involved. This study confirms the opportunity of adopting double reading as a routine procedure in mammographic screening.

Cytologic features of 22 radial scar/complex sclerosing lesions of the breast, three of which associated with carcinoma: clinical, mammographic, and histologic correlation.

Radial scar/complex sclerosing lesion (RS/CSL) of the breast has become more frequently detected with the increasing performance of mammography as a screening test. The clinical, mammographic, and cytologic features of 22 cases of histologically proved breast RS/CSL, 3 of which associated with carcinoma arising at the periphery of the lesion, were reviewed. Clinical examination and mammography did not show specific features in differentiating RS/CSL from carcinoma of the breast. Cytology of RS/CSL without associated malignant changes was dominated by bland epithelial clusters and bipolar naked nuclei. Apocrine cells, papillary clusters, foam cells, and fibrillary elastoid material were also frequently seen. At the cytologic review, only one case of RS with apocrine adenosis, showing atypical cells, was diagnosed as suspicious. Two of the three cases of CSL with associated carcinoma in situ were cytologically characterized by the presence of single atypical cells. In the third case, characterized by a small tubular carcinoma near to CSL, fine-needle aspiration cytology revealed few tubular clusters without myoepithelial cells. Although cytology of RS/CSL without associated carcinoma does not seem characteristic, in most cases a diagnosis of benignancy can be performed correctly. The application of fine-needle aspiration cytology to mammographic lesions with features suggesting RS/CSL may permit a better planning of these lesions.