Enhancing Early-Stage Breast Cancer Survivorship: Evidence-Based Strategies, Surveillance Testing, and Imaging Guidelines.

Addressing the challenges of survivorship necessitates a comprehensive, patient-centered approach, focusing on mitigating risk through lifestyle modification, identifying distant recurrence, and optimization of breast imaging. This article will discuss the current and emerging clinical strategies for the survivorship period, advocating a multidisciplinary and comprehensive approach. In this manner, early-stage breast cancer survivors are empowered to navigate their journey with enhanced knowledge, facilitating a transition to life beyond cancer.

Comparative Performance of Contrast-enhanced Mammography, Abbreviated Breast MRI, and Standard Breast MRI for Breast Cancer Screening.

Background Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and abbreviated breast MRI (ABMRI) are emerging alternatives to standard MRI for supplemental breast cancer screening. Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of CEM, ABMRI, and standard MRI. Materials and Methods This single-institution, prospective, blinded reader study included female participants referred for breast MRI from January 2018 to June 2021. CEM was performed within 14 days of standard MRI; ABMRI was produced from standard MRI images. Two readers independently interpreted each CEM and ABMRI after a washout period. Examination-level performance metrics calculated were recall rate, cancer detection, and false-positive biopsy recommendation rates per 1000 examinations and sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation. Bootstrap and permutation tests were used to calculate 95% CIs and compare modalities. Results Evaluated were 492 paired CEM and ABMRI interpretations from 246 participants (median age, 51 years; IQR, 43-61 years). On 49 MRI scans with lesions recommended for biopsy, nine lesions showed malignant pathology. No differences in ABMRI and standard MRI performance were identified. Compared with standard MRI, CEM demonstrated significantly lower recall rate (14.0% vs 22.8%; difference, -8.7%; 95% CI: -14.0, -3.5), lower false-positive biopsy recommendation rate per 1000 examinations (65.0 vs 162.6; difference, -97.6; 95% CI: -146.3, -50.8), and higher specificity (87.8% vs 80.2%; difference, 7.6%; 95% CI: 2.3, 13.1). Compared with standard MRI, CEM had significantly lower cancer detection rate (22.4 vs 36.6; difference, -14.2; 95% CI: -28.5, -2.0) and sensitivity (61.1% vs 100%; difference, -38.9%; 95% CI: -66.7, -12.5). The performance differences between CEM and ABMRI were similar to those observed between CEM and standard MRI. Conclusion ABMRI had comparable performance to standard MRI and may support more efficient MRI screening. CEM had lower recall and higher specificity compared with standard MRI or ABMRI, offset by lower cancer detection rate and sensitivity compared with standard MRI. These trade-offs warrant further consideration of patient population characteristics before widespread screening with CEM. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03517813 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Chang in this issue.

Preoperative Breast MRI: Current Evidence and Patient Selection.

Breast MRI is the most sensitive imaging modality for the assessment of newly diagnosed breast cancer extent and can detect additional mammographically and clinically occult breast cancers in the ipsilateral and contralateral breasts. Nonetheless, appropriate use of breast MRI in the setting of newly diagnosed breast cancer remains debated. Though highly sensitive, MRI is less specific and may result in false positives and overestimation of disease when MRI findings are not biopsied prior to surgical excision. Furthermore, improved anatomic depiction of breast cancer on MRI has not consistently translated to improved clinical outcomes, such as lower rates of re-excision or breast cancer recurrence, though there is a paucity of well-designed studies examining these issues. In addition, current treatment paradigms have been developed in the absence of this more accurate depiction of disease span, which likely has limited the value of MRI. These issues have led to inconsistent and variable utilization of preoperative MRI across practice settings and providers. In this review, we discuss the history of breast MRI and its current use and recommendations with a focus on the preoperative setting. We review the evidence surrounding the use of preoperative MRI in the evaluation of breast malignancies and discuss the data on breast MRI in the setting of specific patient factors often used to determine breast MRI eligibility, such as age, index tumor phenotype, and breast density. Finally, we review the impact of breast MRI on surgical outcomes (re-excision and mastectomy rates) and long-term breast recurrence and survival outcomes.

It's a Two-Way Street: Giving and Receiving Feedback to the Unaware.

Giving and receiving constructive feedback is a valuable skill and an evolving process due to improved understanding and changes in culture. This article provides a practical review of key elements of effective feedback skills and strategies for providing constructive feedback, with a focus on how to address recipients who may have impaired insight into the issue at hand. Commonly known tips and tricks include direct, immediate, and specific feedback delivered in a safe setting and in a conversational manner. This article specifically considers how the feedback will be heard or accepted by the intended recipient, in order for the educator to best overcome hurdles in relaying constructive criticism.

When cardiomyopathy, cancer, and COVID-19 collide: A case report.

Malignancy has historically prohibited solid organ transplant; however, patients with effectively treated, favorable-risk cancers should not necessarily be eliminated as transplant candidates. These cases require careful review by a multidisciplinary team. Here, we report the case of a woman with end-stage heart failure undergoing heart transplant evaluation during the COVID pandemic who was found to have early-stage, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Given her favorable cancer-related prognosis, a multidisciplinary committee recommended lumpectomy, accelerated partial breast irradiation, and adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy for definitive treatment to allow for consideration of orthotopic heart transplant.

Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Audit: Pitfalls, Challenges, and Future Considerations.

Breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is the most sensitive imaging modality for breast cancer detection and guidelines recommend its use, in addition to screening mammography, for high-risk women. The most recent American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) manual coordinated cross-modality BI-RADS terminology and established an outcome monitoring section that helps guide a medical imaging outcomes audit. This article provides a framework for performing a breast MR imaging audit in clinical practice, incorporating ACR BI-RADS guidance and more recently published data, clarifies common pitfalls, and discusses audit challenges related to evolving clinical practice.

A phased approach to implementing the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) in low-income and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Successful breast cancer detection programs rely on standardized reporting and interpreting systems, such as the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), to improve system performance. In low-income and middle-income countries, evolving diagnostic programs have insufficient resources to either fully implement BI-RADS or to periodically evaluate the program's performance, which is a necessary component of BI-RADS. This leads to inconsistent breast ultrasound interpretation and a failure to improve performance. METHODS: The authors applied the Breast Health Global Initiative's phased implementation strategy to implement diagnostic ultrasound and BI-RADS within the context of a limited-resource setting. RESULTS: The authors recommended starting with triage ultrasound to distinguish suspicious masses from normal breast tissue and benign masses such as cysts because the majority of health workers performing ultrasounds at this level have minimal breast imaging experience. Transitioning to full diagnostic ultrasound with condensed or full BI-RADS should occur after performance and quality metrics have been met. CONCLUSIONS: Transitioning through these phases across facilities likely will occur at different times, particularly in rural versus urban settings.

The Impact of Preoperative Breast MRI on Surgical Management of Women with Newly Diagnosed Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Use of preoperative breast MRI (pMRI) to evaluate ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) extent is controversial due to limited data on its impact on surgical management. We sought to evaluate the effect of pMRI on surgical management of women with core needle biopsy (CNB)-diagnosed pure DCIS at a multidisciplinary academic institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included all women with CNB-diagnosed DCIS (1/2004-12/2013) without prior ipsilateral breast cancer and who underwent surgery within 180 days of diagnosis. Patient features, number of CNBs and surgeries, and single successful breast conserving surgery (BCS) rate were compared between pMRI and no-pMRI cohorts. Number of surgeries and single BCS success rates were also compared to published US (SEER) and Danish National Registry data. RESULTS: Among the 373 women included, no clinical differences were identified between the pMRI (n = 332) and no-pMRI (n = 41) cohorts (p > 0.05). The pMRI group experienced a higher additional CNB rate (30% vs. 7%, p = 0.002) but fewer total surgeries (mean = 1.2 vs. 1.5, p < 0.001) than the no-pMRI group. Among the 245 women for whom BCS was attempted, the pMRI cohort underwent fewer mean surgeries (1.3 vs. 1.7, p < 0.001) with a greater single successful BCS rate (77% vs. 43%, p < 0.001). Compared to published data, women with pMRI who underwent BCS experienced fewer surgeries (difference (Δ) = -0.22 vs. -0.17, p < 0.001) with a higher single successful BCS rate (Δ = +20% vs. +14%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: pMRI may improve surgical management of DCIS at multidisciplinary centers with breast cancer specialists.

The Radiologist's Role in a Breast Multidisciplinary Tumor Board.

Breast multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) play an important role in determining treatment. This article serves as a guide for the radiologist participating in a breast MTB, as the information presented at MTB can significantly influence treatment plans and dictate future steps for further patient work-up. Multidisciplinary tumor board preparation involves a careful review of the patient's history while gathering all relevant imaging studies, and reinterpreting them when appropriate. Presented images should be carefully selected, annotated, and displayed clearly before providing final recommendations for localization and incompletely assessed findings. Anatomic staging factors from the AJCC Breast Cancer Staging System, such as tumor size and degree of suspected skin involvement, should be described. In addition, there are many other types of information that the treatment specialists want to know. The surgeon is interested in anatomic information that will help them decide whether breast conservation therapy is feasible or if local structures, such as the nipple, can be spared. The radiation oncologist may need to know whether accelerated partial breast irradiation is feasible or if postmastectomy radiation therapy is indicated. The medical oncologist is looking for factors that may provide an indication for neoadjuvant therapy and ensuring there is a reliable follow-up method for evaluating the response to treatment, such as comparative MRI. Additionally, all specialists need to know the extent of suspected nodal involvement. By clearly and comprehensively presenting this information to the rest of the MTB team, the radiologist provides a vital contribution that guides treatment and ensures adherence to clinical guidelines.

A Review of Innovative Teaching Methods.

Teaching is one of the important roles of an academic radiologist. Therefore, it is important that radiologists are taught how to effectively educate and, in turn, to act as role models of these skills to trainees. This is reinforced by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education which has the requirement that all residents who interact with and teach medical students must undergo training in effective methods of teaching. Radiologists are likely familiar with the traditional didactic lecture-type teaching format. However, there are many newer innovative teaching methods that could be added to the radiologist's teaching repertoire, which could be used to enhance the traditional lecture format. The Association of University Radiologists Radiology Research Alliance Task Force on Noninterpretive Skills therefore presents a review of several innovative teaching methods, which include the use of audience response technology, long-distance teaching, the flipped classroom, and active learning.

Practical Presentation Pearls: Evidence-based Recommendations From the Psychology and Physiology Literature.

Oral presentations remain a common teaching method in academic radiology. The goal of these presentations is to transfer knowledge from the presenter's brain to brains in the audience in a way that sticks. A number of studies from the recent psychological and physiological literature offer some rather practical and evidence-based advice on ways to optimize our oral presentations. The purpose of this paper is to summarize this work, and to give examples of how it can be harnessed to increase the efficacy of radiology presentations, whether they are for resident education, a continuing medical education course, or for a scientific presentation at a national radiology meeting.

Assessment of Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Background Parenchymal Enhancement Parameters to Improve Determination of Individual Breast Cancer Risk.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to identify optimal quantitative breast magnetic resonance imaging background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) parameters associated with breast cancer risk and compare performance to qualitative assessments. METHODS: Using a matched case-control cohort of 46 high-risk women who underwent screening magnetic resonance imaging (23 who developed breast cancer matched to 23 who did not), fibroglandular tissue area, BPE area, and intensity metrics (mean, SD, quartiles, skewness, and kurtosis) were quantitatively measured at varying enhancement thresholds. Optimal thresholds for discriminating between cancer and control cohorts were identified for each metric and performance summarized using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: Women who developed breast cancer exhibited greater BPE area (adjusted P = 0.004) and higher intensity statistics (adjusted P < 0.004, except skewness and kurtosis with P > 0.99) than did control subjects, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranging from 0.75 to 0.78 at optimized thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated quantitative BPE parameters, related to both area and intensity of enhancement, are associated with breast cancer development.

Cumulative Risk Distribution for Interval Invasive Second Breast Cancers After Negative Surveillance Mammography.

Purpose The aim of the current study was to characterize the risk of interval invasive second breast cancers within 5 years of primary breast cancer treatment. Methods We examined 65,084 surveillance mammograms from 18,366 women with a primary breast cancer diagnosis of unilateral ductal carcinoma in situ or stage I to III invasive breast carcinoma performed from 1996 to 2012 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Interval invasive breast cancer was defined as ipsilateral or contralateral cancer diagnosed within 1 year after a negative surveillance mammogram. Discrete-time survival models-adjusted for all covariates-were used to estimate the probability of interval invasive cancer, given the risk factors for each surveillance round, and aggregated across rounds to estimate the 5-year cumulative probability of interval invasive cancer. Results We observed 474 surveillance-detected cancers-334 invasive and 140 ductal carcinoma in situ-and 186 interval invasive cancers which yielded a cancer detection rate of 7.3 per 1,000 examinations (95% CI, 6.6 to 8.0) and an interval invasive cancer rate of 2.9 per 1,000 examinations (95% CI, 2.5 to 3.3). Median cumulative 5-year interval cancer risk was 1.4% (interquartile range, 0.8% to 2.3%; 10th to 90th percentile range, 0.5% to 3.7%), and 15% of women had ≥ 3% 5-year interval invasive cancer risk. Cumulative 5-year interval cancer risk was highest for women with estrogen receptor- and progesterone receptor-negative primary breast cancer (2.6%; 95% CI, 1.7% to 3.5%), interval cancer presentation at primary diagnosis (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.5% to 2.9%), and breast conservation without radiation (1.8%; 95% CI, 1.1% to 2.4%). Conclusion Risk of interval invasive second breast cancer varies across women and is influenced by characteristics that can be measured at initial diagnosis, treatment, and imaging. Risk prediction models that evaluate the risk of cancers not detected by surveillance mammography should be developed to inform discussions of tailored surveillance.

Radiologic computed tomography features of Mycobacterium abscessus in cystic fibrosis.

INTRODUCTION: Mycobacterium abscessus infection in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients can lead to poor outcomes. Early diagnosis is important, but there are no studies outlining specific imaging features of M. abscessus in CF. OBJECTIVES: To describe the computed tomography (CT) findings of early M. abscessus infection in our CF population. METHODS: Thirteen CF patients with sputum cultures positive for M. abscessus from 2006 to 2013 were identified at our institution. Clinical characteristics including culture dates and lung function were reviewed. Positive cultures were classified as "disease" versus "colonization" based on published criteria. Chest CT scans were reviewed at times closest to initial infection, and features including bronchiectasis, mucous plugging, consolidation, ground glass opacities, nodules, and cavitation were evaluated. Brody scores were calculated to evaluate extent of CF lung disease. RESULTS: All patients had bronchiectasis and mucous plugging, with 10 of 13 (76.9%) in an upper lobe distribution. Consolidation was seen in 12 of 13 (92.3%) patients, 8 (61.5%) patients had nodules, and 5 (38.5%) with cavitation. The average Brody score was 59.5, which was no different than previously described CF cohorts without M. abscessus. There were no significant differences between subjects with disease versus colonization. CONCLUSION: The most common CT features of early M. abscessus in our CF population include bronchiectasis, mucus plugging, and consolidation, but the findings did not reveal a unique radiologic signature. CT at this initial time point may not distinguish early M. abscessus infection from background lung disease or mycobacterial colonization in CF patients.

Visibility of mammographically occult breast cancer on diffusion-weighted MRI versus ultrasound.

PURPOSE: To investigate the visibility of mammographically occult breast cancers on diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) versus ultrasound. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mammographically occult breast cancers (n=60) initially detected on contrast-enhanced MRI that underwent pre-biopsy targeted ultrasound were retrospectively evaluated for visibility on DWI and ultrasound. RESULTS: More cancers were visible on DWI than ultrasound (78% vs. 63%; p=0.049), with 32 (53%) visible on both and 7 (12%) not visible on either. Visibility differences were more significant in larger lesions (92% vs. 68%, p=0.006). CONCLUSION: DWI may detect more mammographically occult cancers than ultrasound, warranting further investigation as an alternative supplemental screening technique.

Imaging Surveillance After Primary Breast Cancer Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Current clinical guidelines are consistent in supporting annual mammography for women after treatment of primary breast cancer. Surveillance imaging beyond standard digital mammography, including digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), breast ultrasound, and MRI, may improve outcomes. This article reviews the evidence on the performance and effectiveness of breast imaging modalities available for surveillance after treatment of sporadic unilateral primary breast cancer and identifies additional factors to be considered when selecting an imaging surveillance regimen. CONCLUSION: Evidence review supports the use of mammography for surveillance after primary breast cancer treatment. Variability exists in guideline recommendations for surveillance initiation, interval, and cessation. DBT offers the most promise as a potential modality to replace standard digital mammography as a front-line surveillance test; a single published study to date has shown a significant decrease in recall rates compared with standard digital mammography alone. Most guidelines do not support the use of whole-breast ultrasound in breast cancer surveillance, and further studies are needed to define the characteristics of women who may benefit from MRI surveillance. The emerging evidence about surveillance imaging outcomes suggests that additional factors, including patient and imaging characteristics, tumor biology and gene expression profile, and choice of treatment, warrant consideration in selecting personalized posttreatment imaging surveillance regimens.

Are Physicians Influenced by Their Own Specialty Society's Guidelines Regarding Mammography Screening? An Analysis of Nationally Representative Data.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether primary care physicians were influenced by their own specialty society's mammography screening recommendations after the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's (USPSTF) revised recommendations were released. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an analysis of cross-sectional nationally representative data for 2007-2012 from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS). All office-based preventive services visits for women 40 years old or older were included. Multivariate regression analyses were used to identify changes over time in the mammography referral rate per 1000 visits by physician specialty, adjusting for patient- and office-level covariates. All analyses were weighted to account for the multistage probability sampling design of NAMCS. RESULTS: Our analysis represented an average of 35,947,290 office visits per year. Overall, between 2007-2008 and 2011-2012, mammography referral rates (per 1000 visits) decreased from 285 to 215 referrals (-25.0% adjusted change; p = 0.006). The largest decrease was among family physicians (from 230 to 128; -49.0% adjusted change; p < 0.001), followed by internal medicine physicians (from 135 to 79; -45.8% adjusted change; p = 0.038). No statistically significant change was noted among obstetricians and gynecologists over time (from 476 to 419; -14.4% adjusted change; p = 0.23). DISCUSSION: Family and internal medicine physicians, whose societies adhered to 2009 USPSTF recommendations for biennial screening starting at age 50 years, showed statistically significant decreases in mammography referral rates over time. Obstetricians and gynecologists, whose society continued to recommend annual screening starting at age 40 years, showed no statistically significant change in mammography referral rates over time. Physicians may be influenced by their own society's recommendations, which may influence their shared decision-making discussions with patients.