Using Patient Navigation to Reduce Time to Diagnosis of Breast Cancer in Uganda.

PURPOSE: The Ugandan Ministry of Health adopted BI-RADS as standard of care in 2016. The authors performed a medical audit of breast ultrasound practices at four tertiary-level hospitals to assess interpretive performance. The authors also determined the effect of a low-cost navigation program linking breast imaging and pathology on the percentage of patients completing diagnostic care. METHODS: The authors retrieved 966 consecutive diagnostic breast ultrasound reports, with complete data, for studies performed on women aged >18 years presenting with symptoms of breast cancer between 2018 and 2020 from participating hospitals. Ultrasound results were linked to tumor registries and patient follow-up. A medical audit was performed according to the ACR's BI-RADS Atlas, fifth edition, and results were compared with those of a prior audit performed in 2013. At Mulago Hospital, an intervention was piloted on the basis of patient navigation, cost sharing, and same-day imaging, tissue sampling, and pathology. RESULTS: In total, 888 breast ultrasound examinations (91.9%) were eligible for inclusion. Compared with 2013, the postintervention cancer detection rate increased from 38 to 148.7 cancers per 1,000 examinations, positive predictive value 2 from 29.6% to 48.9%, and positive predictive value 3 from 62.7% to 79.9%. Specificity decreased from 90.5% to 87.7% and sensitivity from 92.3% to 81.1%. The mean time from tissue sampling to receipt of a diagnosis decreased from 60 to 7 days. The intervention increased the percentage of patients completing diagnostic care from 0% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to establish a culture of continuous quality improvement in breast ultrasound require robust data collection that links imaging results to pathology and patient follow-up. Interpretive performance met BI-RADS benchmarks for palpable masses, except sensitivity. This resource-appropriate strategy linking imaging, tissue sampling, and pathology interpretation decreased time to diagnosis and rates of loss to follow-up and improved the precision of the audit.

Breast Cancer Screening in the Intermediate-Risk Population: Falling Through the Cracks?

Breast cancer screening guidelines vary for women at intermediate risk (15%-20% lifetime risk) for developing breast cancer across jurisdictions. Currently available risk assessment models have differing strengths and weaknesses, creating difficulty and ambiguity in selecting the most appropriate model to utilize. Clarifying which model to utilize in individual circumstances may help determine the best screening guidelines to use for each individual.

Black Women's Perspectives on Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to gather the perspectives of Black women on breast cancer risk assessment through a series of one-on-one interviews. METHODS: The authors conducted a cross-sectional qualitative study consisting of one-on-one semistructured telephone interviews with Black women in Tennessee between September 2020 and November 2020. Guided by the Health Belief Model, qualitative analysis of interview data was performed in an iterative inductive and deductive approach and resulted in the development of a conceptual framework to depict influences on a woman's decision to engage with breast cancer risk assessment. RESULTS: A total of 37 interviews were completed, and a framework of influences on a woman's decision to engage in breast cancer risk assessment was developed. Study participants identified several emerging themes regarding women's perspectives on breast cancer risk assessment and potential influences on women's decisions to engage with risk assessment. Much of women's decision context was based on risk appraisal (perceived severity of cancer and susceptibility of cancer), emotions (fear and trust), and perceived risks and benefits of having risk assessment. The decision was further influenced by modifiers such as communication, the risk assessment protocol, access to health care, knowledge, and health status. Perceived challenges to follow-up if identified as high risk also influenced women's decisions to pursue risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Black women in this study identified several barriers to engagement with breast cancer risk assessment. Efforts to overcome these barriers and increase the use of breast cancer risk assessment can potentially serve as a catalyst to address existing breast cancer disparities. Continued work is needed to develop patient-centric strategies to overcome identified barriers.

Barriers to Implementation of Breast Cancer Risk Assessment: The Health Care Team Perspective.

PURPOSE: To assess health care professionals' perceptions of barriers to the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment tools in the public health setting through a series of one-on-one interviews with health care team members. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional qualitative study consisting of one-on-one semistructured telephone interviews with health care team members in the public health setting in the state of Tennessee between May 2020 and October 2020. An iterative inductive-deductive approach was used for qualitative analysis of interview data, resulting in the development of a conceptual framework to depict influences of provider behavior in the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment. RESULTS: A total of 24 interviews were completed, and a framework of influences of provider behavior in the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment was developed. Participants identified barriers to the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment (knowledge and understanding of risk assessment tools, workflow challenges, and availability of personnel); patient-level barriers as perceived by health care team members (psychological, economic, educational, and environmental); and strategies to increase the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment at the provider level (leadership buy-in, training, supportive policies, and incentives) and patient level (improved communication and better understanding of patients' perceived cancer risk and severity of cancer). CONCLUSIONS: Understanding barriers to implementation of breast cancer risk assessment and strategies to overcome these barriers as perceived by health care team members offers an opportunity to improve implementation of risk assessment and to identify a racially, geographically, and socioeconomically diverse population of young women at high risk for breast cancer.

Strategies to Improve Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Breast Imaging Training and Beyond.

Diversity and inclusion in breast imaging can improve creativity and innovation, enrich the workplace environment, and enhance culturally appropriate care for an increasingly diverse patient population. Current estimates predict the racial and ethnic demographics of the United States population will change markedly by the year 2060, with increases in representation of the Black demographic projected to comprise 15% of the population (currently 13.3%) and the Hispanic/Latinx demographic projected to comprise 27.5% of the population (currently 17.8%). However, matriculation rates for those who are underrepresented in medicine (URM), defined as "racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population," have remained largely stagnant. Black students comprise only 7.1% of medical student matriculants, and Hispanic/Latinx students comprise only 6.2% of medical school matriculants compared to the general population. The matriculation rate of URM students into diagnostic radiology is even lower, with Black trainees comprising 3.1% of radiology residents and Hispanic/Latinx trainees comprising 4.8% of radiology residents. This lack of URM radiology resident representation leads to a lack of URM potential applicants to breast imaging fellowships due to the pipeline effect. Strategies to improve diversity and inclusion in breast imaging include recruiting a diverse breast imaging workforce, establishing robust mentorship and sponsorship programs, fostering an inclusive training and workplace environment, and retaining and promoting a diverse workforce.

O-RADS for Ultrasound: A User's Guide, From the AJR Special Series on Radiology Reporting and Data Systems.

The Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) is a lexicon and risk stratification tool designed for the accurate characterization of adnexal lesions and is essential for optimal patient management. O-RADS is a recent addition to the American College of Radiology (ACR) reporting and data systems and consists of ultrasound (US) and MRI arms. Since most ovarian or adnexal lesions are first detected with US, O-RADS US is considered the primary assessment tool. Application of O-RADS US is recommended whenever a nonphysiologic lesion is encountered. Lesion characterization may be streamlined by use of an algorithmic approach focused on relevant features and an abbreviated version of the lexicon. Resources to expedite O-RADS US categorization and determination of a management recommendation include easy online access to the ACR color-coded risk stratification scorecards and an O-RADS US calculator that is available as a smartphone app. Reporting should be concise and include relevant features for risk stratification that adhere to lexicon terminology. Technical considerations include optimization of gray-scale and color Doppler technique and performance of problem-solving maneuvers to help avoid common pitfalls. This review provides a user-friendly summary of O-RADS US with practical tips for everyday clinical use.

Impact of Original and Artificially Improved Artificial Intelligence-based Computer-aided Diagnosis on Breast US Interpretation.

OBJECTIVE: For breast US interpretation, to assess impact of computer-aided diagnosis (CADx) in original mode or with improved sensitivity or specificity. METHODS: In this IRB approved protocol, orthogonal-paired US images of 319 lesions identified on screening, including 88 (27.6%) cancers (median 7 mm, range 1-34 mm), were reviewed by 9 breast imaging radiologists. Each observer provided BI-RADS assessments (2, 3, 4A, 4B, 4C, 5) before and after CADx in a mode-balanced design: mode 1, original CADx (outputs benign, probably benign, suspicious, or malignant); mode 2, artificially-high-sensitivity CADx (benign or malignant); and mode 3, artificially-high-specificity CADx (benign or malignant). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was estimated under each modality and for standalone CADx outputs. Multi-reader analysis accounted for inter-reader variability and correlation between same-lesion assessments. RESULTS: AUC of standalone CADx was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.72-0.83). For mode 1, average reader AUC was 0.82 (range 0.76-0.84) without CADx and not significantly changed with CADx. In high-sensitivity mode, all observers' AUCs increased: average AUC 0.83 (range 0.78-0.86) before CADx increased to 0.88 (range 0.84-0.90), P < 0.001. In high-specificity mode, all observers' AUCs increased: average AUC 0.82 (range 0.76-0.84) before CADx increased to 0.89 (range 0.87-0.92), P < 0.0001. Radiologists responded more frequently to malignant CADx cues in high-specificity mode (42.7% vs 23.2% mode 1, and 27.0% mode 2, P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: Original CADx did not substantially impact radiologists' interpretations. Radiologists showed improved performance and were more responsive when CADx produced fewer false-positive malignant cues.

Educational Strategies to Achieve Equitable Breast Imaging Care.

As the population of the United States becomes increasingly diverse, radiologists must learn to both understand and mitigate the impact of health disparities. Significant health disparities persist in radiologic care, including breast imaging. Racial and ethnic minorities, women from lower socioeconomic status, those living in rural areas, and the uninsured bear a disproportionate burden of breast cancer morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no centralized radiology curriculum focusing on breast health disparities available to residents, breast imaging fellows, or practicing breast radiologists. While patient-, provider-, and system-level initiatives are necessary to overcome disparities, our purpose is to describe educational strategies targeted to breast imaging radiologists at all levels to provide equitable care to a diverse population. These strategies may include, but are not limited to, diversifying the breast imaging workforce, understanding the needs of a diverse population, cultural sensitivity and bias training, and fostering awareness of the existing issues in screening mammography access, follow-up imaging, and clinical care.

Image-guided Localization Techniques for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: An Opportunity for Multidisciplinary Patient-centered Care.

Selection of a localization method for nonpalpable breast lesions offers an opportunity for institutions to seek multidisciplinary input to promote value-based, patient-centered care. The diverse range of nonpalpable breast and axillary pathologies identified through increased utilization of screening mammography often necessitates image-guided preoperative localization for accurate lesion identification and excision. Preoperative localization techniques for breast and axillary lesions have evolved to include both wire and nonwire methods, the latter of which include radioactive seeds, radar reflectors, magnetic seeds, and radiofrequency identification tag localizers. There are no statistically significant differences in surgical outcomes when comparing wire and nonwire localization devices. Factors to consider during selection and adoption of image-guided localization systems include physician preference and ease of use, workflow efficiency, and patient satisfaction.

Isolated Flat Epithelial Atypia on Core Biopsy Specimens Is Associated With a Low Risk of Upgrade at Excision.

OBJECTIVES: We present a retrospective review of 111 breast core biopsy specimens with flat epithelial atypia (FEA) and corresponding excision to better understand rates of upgrade following this diagnosis. METHODS: In total, 252 breast core biopsy specimens were identified. Cases were excluded if biopsy slides or excision results were unavailable, for ipsilateral carcinoma or other findings warranting excision, or biopsy performed for indications other than mammographically detected calcifications. Coincident atypical lobular hyperplasia was not excluded. Diagnoses were confirmed by breast pathologists, and mammographic images were reviewed. RESULTS: Ultimately, 111 biopsy specimens with FEA were included. In subsequent excisions, one (1%) of 111 showed invasive carcinoma, 20 (18%) atypical ductal hyperplasia, 20 (18%) lobular neoplasia, 31 (28%) FEA, and 39 (35%) no atypical findings. CONCLUSIONS: FEA on core biopsy specimens is associated with a low rate of upgrade to invasive carcinoma. Close follow-up may be a reasonable alternative to excision for isolated FEA on core needle biopsy specimens.