Assessment of Hypoxia in Breast Cancer: Emerging Functional MR Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques and Clinical Applications.

Breast cancer is one of the most prevalent forms of cancer affecting women worldwide. Hypoxia, a condition characterized by insufficient oxygen supply in tumor tissues, is closely associated with tumor aggressiveness, resistance to therapy, and poor clinical outcomes. Accurate assessment of tumor hypoxia can guide treatment decisions, predict therapy response, and contribute to the development of targeted therapeutic interventions. Over the years, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) techniques have emerged as promising noninvasive imaging options for evaluating hypoxia in cancer. Such techniques include blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) MRI, oxygen-enhanced MRI (OE) MRI, chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) MRI, and proton MRS (1H-MRS). These may help overcome the limitations of the routinely used dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) techniques, contributing to better diagnosis and understanding of the biological features of breast cancer. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the emerging functional MRI and MRS techniques for assessing hypoxia in breast cancer, along with their evolving clinical applications. The integration of these techniques in clinical practice holds promising implications for breast cancer management. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 1.

AI Applications to Breast MRI: Today and Tomorrow.

In breast imaging, there is an unrelenting increase in the demand for breast imaging services, partly explained by continuous expanding imaging indications in breast diagnosis and treatment. As the human workforce providing these services is not growing at the same rate, the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) in breast imaging has gained significant momentum to maximize workflow efficiency and increase productivity while concurrently improving diagnostic accuracy and patient outcomes. Thus far, the implementation of AI in breast imaging is at the most advanced stage with mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis techniques, followed by ultrasound, whereas the implementation of AI in breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not moving along as rapidly due to the complexity of MRI examinations and fewer available dataset. Nevertheless, there is persisting interest in AI-enhanced breast MRI applications, even as the use of and indications of breast MRI continue to expand. This review presents an overview of the basic concepts of AI imaging analysis and subsequently reviews the use cases for AI-enhanced MRI interpretation, that is, breast MRI triaging and lesion detection, lesion classification, prediction of treatment response, risk assessment, and image quality. Finally, it provides an outlook on the barriers and facilitators for the adoption of AI in breast MRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 6.

BI-RADS Category Assignments by GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Google Bard: A Multilanguage Study.

Background The performance of publicly available large language models (LLMs) remains unclear for complex clinical tasks. Purpose To evaluate the agreement between human readers and LLMs for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories assigned based on breast imaging reports written in three languages and to assess the impact of discordant category assignments on clinical management. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included reports for women who underwent MRI, mammography, and/or US for breast cancer screening or diagnostic purposes at three referral centers. Reports with findings categorized as BI-RADS 1-5 and written in Italian, English, or Dutch were collected between January 2000 and October 2023. Board-certified breast radiologists and the LLMs GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 (OpenAI) and Bard, now called Gemini (Google), assigned BI-RADS categories using only the findings described by the original radiologists. Agreement between human readers and LLMs for BI-RADS categories was assessed using the Gwet agreement coefficient (AC1 value). Frequencies were calculated for changes in BI-RADS category assignments that would affect clinical management (ie, BI-RADS 0 vs BI-RADS 1 or 2 vs BI-RADS 3 vs BI-RADS 4 or 5) and compared using the McNemar test. Results Across 2400 reports, agreement between the original and reviewing radiologists was almost perfect (AC1 = 0.91), while agreement between the original radiologists and GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and Bard was moderate (AC1 = 0.52, 0.48, and 0.42, respectively). Across human readers and LLMs, differences were observed in the frequency of BI-RADS category upgrades or downgrades that would result in changed clinical management (118 of 2400 [4.9%] for human readers, 611 of 2400 [25.5%] for Bard, 573 of 2400 [23.9%] for GPT-3.5, and 435 of 2400 [18.1%] for GPT-4; P < .001) and that would negatively impact clinical management (37 of 2400 [1.5%] for human readers, 435 of 2400 [18.1%] for Bard, 344 of 2400 [14.3%] for GPT-3.5, and 255 of 2400 [10.6%] for GPT-4; P < .001). Conclusion LLMs achieved moderate agreement with human reader-assigned BI-RADS categories across reports written in three languages but also yielded a high percentage of discordant BI-RADS categories that would negatively impact clinical management. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Pilot study: A simple CAD-based tool to detect breast cancer on MRI of the breast.

PURPOSE: This pilot-study aims to assess, whether quantitatively assessed enhancing breast tissue as a percentage of the entire breast volume can serve as an indicator of breast cancer at breast MRI and whether the contrast-agent employed affects diagnostic efficacy. MATERIALS: This retrospective IRB-approved study, included 39 consecutive patients, that underwent two subsequent breast MRI exams for suspicious findings at conventional imaging with 0.1 mmol/kg gadobenic and gadoteric acid. Two independent readers, blinded to the histopathological outcome, assessed unenhanced and early post-contrast images using computer-assisted software (Brevis, Siemens Healthcare). Diagnostic performance was statistically determined for percentage of ipsilateral voxel volume enhancement and for percentage of contralateral enhancing voxel volume subtracted from ipsilateral enhancing voxel volume after crosstabulation with the dichotomized histological outcome (benign/malignant). RESULTS: Ipsilateral enhancing voxel volume versus histopathological outcome resulted in an AUC of 0.707 and 0.687 for gadobenic acid, reader 1 and 2, respectively and in an AUC of 0.778 and 0.773 for gadoteric acid, reader 1 and 2, respectively. Accounting for background parenchymal enhancement by subtracting contralateral enhancing volume from ipsilateral enhancing voxel volume versus histolopathological outcome resulted in an AUC of 0.793 and 0.843 for gadobenic acid, reader 1 and 2, respectively and in an AUC of 0.692 and 0.662 for gadoteric acid, reader 1 and 2, respectively. Pairwise testing yielded no statistically significant difference both between readers and between contrast agents employed (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our proposed CAD algorithm, which quantitatively assesses enhancing breast tissue as a percentage of the entire breast volume, allows indicating the presence of breast cancer.

Current use and future perspectives of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM): a survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI).

OBJECTIVES: To perform a survey among members of the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) regarding the use of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM). METHODS: A panel of nine board-certified radiologists developed a 29-item online questionnaire, distributed to all EUSOBI members (inside and outside Europe) from January 25 to March 10, 2023. CEM implementation, examination protocols, reporting strategies, and current and future CEM indications were investigated. Replies were exploratively analyzed with descriptive and non-parametric statistics. RESULTS: Among 434 respondents (74.9% from Europe), 50% (217/434) declared to use CEM, 155/217 (71.4%) seeing less than 200 CEMs per year. CEM use was associated with academic settings and high breast imaging workload (p < 0.001). The lack of CEM adoption was most commonly due to the perceived absence of a clinical need (65.0%) and the lack of resources to acquire CEM-capable systems (37.3%). CEM protocols varied widely, but most respondents (61.3%) had already adopted the 2022 ACR CEM BI-RADS® lexicon. CEM use in patients with contraindications to MRI was the most common current indication (80.6%), followed by preoperative staging (68.7%). Patients with MRI contraindications also represented the most commonly foreseen CEM indication (88.0%), followed by the work-up of inconclusive findings at non-contrast examinations (61.5%) and supplemental imaging in dense breasts (53.0%). Respondents declaring CEM use and higher CEM experience gave significantly more current (p = 0.004) and future indications (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a trend towards academic high-workload settings and its prevalent use in patients with MRI contraindications, CEM use and progressive experience were associated with increased confidence in the technique. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: In this first survey on contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) use and perspectives among the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) members, the perceived absence of a clinical need chiefly drove the 50% CEM adoption rate. CEM adoption and progressive experience were associated with more extended current and future indications. KEY POINTS: • Among the 434 members of the European Society of Breast Imaging who completed this survey, 50% declared to use contrast-enhanced mammography in clinical practice. • Due to the perceived absence of a clinical need, contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is still prevalently used as a replacement for MRI in patients with MRI contraindications. • The number of current and future CEM indications marked by respondents was associated with their degree of CEM experience.

Non-Contrast-Enhanced Multiparametric MRI of the Hypoxic Tumor Microenvironment Allows Molecular Subtyping of Breast Cancer: A Pilot Study.

Tumor neoangiogenesis is an important hallmark of cancer progression, triggered by alternating selective pressures from the hypoxic tumor microenvironment. Non-invasive, non-contrast-enhanced multiparametric MRI combining blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) MRI, which depicts blood oxygen saturation, and intravoxel-incoherent-motion (IVIM) MRI, which captures intravascular and extravascular diffusion, can provide insights into tumor oxygenation and neovascularization simultaneously. Our objective was to identify imaging markers that can predict hypoxia-induced angiogenesis and to validate our findings using multiplexed immunohistochemical analyses. We present an in vivo study involving 36 female athymic nude mice inoculated with luminal A, Her2+, and triple-negative breast cancer cells. We used a high-field 9.4-tesla MRI system for imaging and subsequently analyzed the tumors using multiplex immunohistochemistry for CD-31, PDGFR-ß, and Hif1-α. We found that the hyperoxic-BOLD-MRI-derived parameter ΔR2* discriminated luminal A from Her2+ and triple-negative breast cancers, while the IVIM-derived parameter fIVIM discriminated luminal A and Her2+ from triple-negative breast cancers. A comprehensive analysis using principal-component analysis of both multiparametric MRI- and mpIHC-derived data highlighted the differences between triple-negative and luminal A breast cancers. We conclude that multiparametric MRI combining hyperoxic BOLD MRI and IVIM MRI, without the need for contrast agents, offers promising non-invasive markers for evaluating hypoxia-induced angiogenesis.

Breast MRI in patients with implantable loop recorder: initial experience.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the feasibility of breast MRI exams and guided biopsies in patients with an implantable loop recorder (ILR) as well as the impact ILRs may have on image interpretation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study examined breast MRIs of patients with ILR, from April 2008 to September 2022. Radiological reports and electronic medical records were reviewed for demographic characteristics, safety concerns, and imaging findings. MR images were analyzed and compared statistically for artifact quantification on the various pulse sequences. RESULTS: Overall, 40/82,778 (0.049%) MRIs during the study period included ILR. All MRIs were completed without early termination. No patient-related or device-related adverse events occurred. ILRs were most commonly located in the left lower-inner quadrant (64.6%). The main artifact was a signal intensity (SI) void in a dipole formation in the ILR bed with or without areas of peripheral high SI. Artifacts appeared greatest in the cranio-caudal axis (p < 0.001), followed by the anterior-posterior axis (p < 0.001), and then the right-left axis. High peripheral rim-like SI artifacts appeared on the post-contrast and subtracted T1-weighted images, mimicking suspicious enhancement. Artifacts were most prominent on diffusion-weighted (p < 0.001), followed by T2-weighted and T1-weighted images. In eight patients, suspicious findings were found on MRI, resulting in four additional malignant lesions. Of six patients with left breast cancer, the tumor was completely visible in five cases and partially obscured in one. CONCLUSION: Breast MRI is feasible and safe among patients with ILR and may provide a significant diagnostic value, albeit with localized, characteristic artifacts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Indicated breast MRI exams and guided biopsies can be safely performed in patients with implantable loop recorder. Nevertheless, radiologists should be aware of associated limitations including limited assessment of the inner left breast and pseudo-enhancement artifacts. KEY POINTS: • Breast MRI in patients with an implantable loop recorder is an infrequent, feasible, and safe procedure. • Despite limited breast visualization of the implantable loop recorder bed and characteristic artifacts, MRI depicted additional lesions in 8/40 (20%) of cases, half of which were malignant. • Breast MRI in patients with an implantable loop recorder should be performed when indicated, taking into consideration typical associated artifacts.

Comparison of Axillary Lymph Nodes on Breast MRI Before and After COVID-19 Booster Vaccination.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Vaccine-related lymphadenopathy is a frequent finding following initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination, but the frequency after COVID-19 booster vaccination is still unknown. In this study we compare axillary lymph node morphology on breast MRI before and after COVID-19 booster vaccination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, single-center, IRB-approved study included patients who underwent breast MRI between October 2021 and December 2021 after the COVID-19 booster vaccination. The axillary lymph node with the greatest cortical thickness ipsilateral to the side of vaccination was measured on MRI after booster vaccination and before initial COVID-19 vaccination. Comparisons were made between patients with and without increase in cortical thickness of ≥ 0.2 cm. Continuous covariates were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum test and categorical covariates were compared using Fisher's exact test. Multiple comparison adjustment was made using the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure. RESULTS: All 128 patients were included. Twenty-four of 128 (19%) displayed an increase in lymph node cortical thickness of ≥ 0.2 cm. Patients who received the booster more recently were more likely to present cortical thickening, with a median of 9 days (IQR 5, 20) vs. 36 days (IQR 18, 59) (p < 0.001). Age (p = 0.5) and type of vaccine (p = 0.7) were not associated with thickening. No ipsilateral breast cancer or malignant lymphadenopathy were diagnosed on follow-up. CONCLUSION: Axillary lymphadenopathy on breast MRI following COVID-19 booster vaccination is a frequent finding, especially in the first 3 weeks after vaccination. Additional evaluation or follow-up may be omitted in patients with low concern for malignancy.

[WITHDRAWN] Predicting breast cancer with AI for individual risk-adjusted MRI screening and early detection.

This paper has been withdrawn by Lukas Hirsch. Major revisions and rewriting in progress.

A Survey of Publicly Available MRI Datasets for Potential Use in Artificial Intelligence Research.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to bring transformative improvements to the field of radiology; yet, there are barriers to widespread clinical adoption. One of the most important barriers has been access to large, well-annotated, widely representative medical image datasets, which can be used to accurately train AI programs. Creating such datasets requires time and expertise and runs into constraints around data security and interoperability, patient privacy, and appropriate data use. Recognizing these challenges, several institutions have started curating and providing publicly available, high-quality datasets that can be accessed by researchers to advance AI models. The purpose of this work was to review the publicly available MRI datasets that can be used for AI research in radiology. Despite being an emerging field, a simple internet search for open MRI datasets presents an overwhelming number of results. Therefore, we decided to create a survey of the major publicly accessible MRI datasets in different subfields of radiology (brain, body, and musculoskeletal), and list the most important features of value to the AI researcher. To complete this review, we searched for publicly available MRI datasets and assessed them based on several parameters (number of subjects, demographics, area of interest, technical features, and annotations). We reviewed 110 datasets across sub-fields with 1,686,245 subjects in 12 different areas of interest ranging from spine to cardiac. This review is meant to serve as a reference for researchers to help spur advancements in the field of AI for radiology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 6.

Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Women with Palpable Breast Abnormalities.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) in the work-up of palpable breast abnormalities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-center combination prospective-retrospective study, women with palpable breast abnormalities underwent CEM evaluation prospectively, comprising the acquisition of low energy (LE) images and recombined images (RI) which depict enhancement, followed by targeted ultrasound (US). Two independent readers retrospectively reviewed the imaging and assigned BI-RADS assessment based on LE alone, LE plus US, RI with LE plus US (CEM plus US), and RI alone. Pathology results or 1-year follow-up imaging served as the reference standard. RESULTS: 237 women with 262 palpable abnormalities were included (mean age, 51 years). Of the 262 palpable abnormalities, 116/262 (44%) had no imaging correlate and 242/262 (92%) were benign. RI alone had better specificity compared to LE plus US (Reader 1, 94% versus 89% (p = 0.009); Reader 2, 93% versus 88% (p = 0.03)), better positive predictive value (Reader 1, 52% versus 42% (p = 0.04); Reader 2, 53% versus 42% (p = 0.04)), and better accuracy (Reader 1, 93% versus 89% (p = 0.05); Reader 2, 93% versus 90% (p = 0.06)). CEM plus US was not significantly different in performance metrics versus LE plus US. CONCLUSION: RI had better specificity compared to LE in combination with US. There was no difference in performance between CEM plus US and LE plus US, likely reflecting the weight US carries in radiologist decision-making. However, the results indicate that the absence of enhancement on RI in the setting of palpable lesions may help avoid benign biopsies.

Identification of impactful imaging biomarker: Clinical applications for breast and prostate carcinoma. / Ermittlung aussagekräftiger Bildgebungsbiomarker: Klinische Anwendungen bei Mamma- und Prostatakarzinomen.

BACKGROUND: Imaging biomarkers are quantitative parameters from imaging modalities, which are collected noninvasively, allow conclusions about physiological and pathophysiological processes, and may consist of single (monoparametric) or multiple parameters (bi- or multiparametric). METHOD: This review aims to present the state of the art for the quantification of multimodal and multiparametric imaging biomarkers. Here, the use of biomarkers using artificial intelligence will be addressed and the clinical application of imaging biomarkers in breast and prostate cancers will be explained. For the preparation of the review article, an extensive literature search was performed based on Pubmed, Web of Science and Google Scholar. The results were evaluated and discussed for consistency and generality. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Different imaging biomarkers (multiparametric) are quantified based on the use of complementary imaging modalities (multimodal) from radiology, nuclear medicine, or hybrid imaging. From these techniques, parameters are determined at the morphological (e. g., size), functional (e. g., vascularization or diffusion), metabolic (e. g., glucose metabolism), or molecular (e. g., expression of prostate specific membrane antigen, PSMA) level. The integration and weighting of imaging biomarkers are increasingly being performed with artificial intelligence, using machine learning algorithms. In this way, the clinical application of imaging biomarkers is increasing, as illustrated by the diagnosis of breast and prostate cancers. KEY POINTS: · Imaging biomarkers are quantitative parameters to detect physiological and pathophysiological processes.. · Imaging biomarkers from multimodality and multiparametric imaging are integrated using artificial intelligence algorithms.. · Quantitative imaging parameters are a fundamental component of diagnostics for all tumor entities, such as for mammary and prostate carcinomas.. CITATION FORMAT: · Bäuerle T, Dietzel M, Pinker K et al. Identification of impactful imaging biomarker: Clinical applications for breast and prostate carcinoma. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; 196: 354 - 362.

Update on DWI for Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Monitoring.

DWI is a noncontrast MRI technique that measures the diffusion of water molecules within biologic tissue. DWI is increasingly incorporated into routine breast MRI examinations. Currently, the main applications of DWI are breast cancer detection and characterization, prognostication, and prediction of treatment response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In addition, DWI is promising as a noncontrast MRI alternative for breast cancer screening. Problems with suboptimal resolution and image quality have restricted the mainstream use of DWI for breast imaging, but these shortcomings are being addressed through several technologic advancements. In this review, we present an up-to-date assessment of the use of DWI for breast cancer imaging, including a summary of the clinical literature and recommendations for future use.

Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Breast MRI: Applications in Breast Cancer Primary Treatment Response Assessment and Prediction.

ABSTRACT: Primary systemic therapy (PST) is the treatment of choice in patients with locally advanced breast cancer and is nowadays also often used in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Although imaging remains pivotal to assess response to PST accurately, the use of imaging to predict response to PST has the potential to not only better prognostication but also allow the de-escalation or omission of potentially toxic treatment with undesirable adverse effects, the accelerated implementation of new targeted therapies, and the mitigation of surgical delays in selected patients. In response to the limited ability of radiologists to predict response to PST via qualitative, subjective assessments of tumors on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), artificial intelligence-enhanced MRI with classical machine learning, and in more recent times, deep learning, have been used with promising results to predict response, both before the start of PST and in the early stages of treatment. This review provides an overview of the current applications of artificial intelligence to MRI in assessing and predicting response to PST, and discusses the challenges and limitations of their clinical implementation.

Current Status of Cancer Genomics and Imaging Phenotypes: What Radiologists Need to Know.

Ongoing discoveries in cancer genomics and epigenomics have revolutionized clinical oncology and precision health care. This knowledge provides unprecedented insights into tumor biology and heterogeneity within a single tumor, among primary and metastatic lesions, and among patients with the same histologic type of cancer. Large-scale genomic sequencing studies also sparked the development of new tumor classifications, biomarkers, and targeted therapies. Because of the central role of imaging in cancer diagnosis and therapy, radiologists need to be familiar with the basic concepts of genomics, which are now becoming the new norm in oncologic clinical practice. By incorporating these concepts into clinical practice, radiologists can make their imaging interpretations more meaningful and specific, facilitate multidisciplinary clinical dialogue and interventions, and provide better patient-centric care. This review article highlights basic concepts of genomics and epigenomics, reviews the most common genetic alterations in cancer, and discusses the implications of these concepts on imaging by organ system in a case-based manner. This information will help stimulate new innovations in imaging research, accelerate the development and validation of new imaging biomarkers, and motivate efforts to bring new molecular and functional imaging methods to clinical radiology. Keywords: Oncology, Cancer Genomics, Epignomics, Radiogenomics, Imaging Markers Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2023.

Preoperative breast MRI positively impacts surgical outcomes of needle biopsy-diagnosed pure DCIS: a patient-matched analysis from the MIPA study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influence of preoperative breast MRI on mastectomy and reoperation rates in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). METHODS: The MIPA observational study database (7245 patients) was searched for patients aged 18-80 years with pure unilateral DCIS diagnosed at core needle or vacuum-assisted biopsy (CNB/VAB) and planned for primary surgery. Patients who underwent preoperative MRI (MRI group) were matched (1:1) to those who did not receive MRI (noMRI group) according to 8 confounding covariates that drive referral to MRI (age; hormonal status; familial risk; posterior-to-nipple diameter; BI-RADS category; lesion diameter; lesion presentation; surgical planning at conventional imaging). Surgical outcomes were compared between the matched groups with nonparametric statistics after calculating odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS: Of 1005 women with pure unilateral DCIS at CNB/VAB (507 MRI group, 498 noMRI group), 309 remained in each group after matching. First-line mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 20.1% (62/309 patients, OR 2.03) compared to 11.0% in the noMRI group (34/309 patients, p = 0.003). The reoperation rate was 10.0% in the MRI group (31/309, OR for reoperation 0.40) and 22.0% in the noMRI group (68/309, p < 0.001), with a 2.53 OR of avoiding reoperation in the MRI group. The overall mastectomy rate was 23.3% in the MRI group (72/309, OR 1.40) and 17.8% in the noMRI group (55/309, p = 0.111). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to those going directly to surgery, patients with pure DCIS at CNB/VAB who underwent preoperative MRI had a higher OR for first-line mastectomy but a substantially lower OR for reoperation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: When confounding factors behind MRI referral are accounted for in the comparison of patients with CNB/VAB-diagnosed pure unilateral DCIS, preoperative MRI yields a reduction of reoperations that is more than twice as high as the increase in overall mastectomies. KEY POINTS: • Confounding factors cause imbalance when investigating the influence of preoperative MRI on surgical outcomes of pure DCIS. • When patient matching is applied to women with pure unilateral DCIS, reoperation rates are significantly reduced in women who underwent preoperative MRI. • The reduction of reoperations brought about by preoperative MRI is more than double the increase in overall mastectomies.