Can mammographic and sonographic imaging features predict the Oncotype DX™ recurrence score in T1 and T2, hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative and axillary lymph node negative breast cancers?

To determine whether mammographic or sonographic features can predict the Oncotype DX™ recurrence scores (RS) in patients with TI-II, hormone receptor (HR) positive, HER2/neu negative and node negative breast cancers. Institutional board review was obtained and informed consent was waived for this retrospective study. Seventy-eight patients with stage I-II invasive breast cancer that was HR positive, HER2 negative, and lymph node negative for whom mammographic and or sonographic imaging and Oncotype DX™ assay scores were available were included in the study Four breast dedicated radiologists blinded to the RS retrospectively described the lesions according to BI-RADS lexicon descriptors. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test for significant independent predictors of low (<18) versus intermediate to high range (≥18). Two imaging features reached statistical significance in predicting low from intermediate or high risk RS: pleomorphic microcalcifications within a mass (P = 0.017); OR 8.37, 95 % CI (1.47-47.79) on mammography and posterior acoustic enhancement in a mass on ultrasound (P = 0.048); OR 4.35, 95 % CI (1.01-18.73) on multivariable logistic regression. A mass with pleomorphic microcalcifications on mammography or the presence of posterior acoustic enhancement on ultrasound may predict an intermediate to high RS as determined by the Oncotype DX(TM) assay in patients with stage I-II HR positive, HER2 negative, and lymph node negative invasive breast cancer.

Mammography result notification letters: are they easy to read and understand?

BACKGROUND: Federal law mandates that mammography centers notify women of their result in writing. The purpose of this study is to assess the readability and ease of use of the sample letters provided as a template for the notification letters centers send to patients. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis of the 43 mammography result notification template letters available from the American College of Radiology and two leading transcription software services. To assess readability, we used the Flesch-Kincaid grade level scale and the Lexile framework. To assess document suitability, we used the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM). Acceptable scores were based on established standards: ≤6th grade for the Flesch-Kincaid level, ≤900 for the Lexile analysis, and ≥40% on the SAM scale. Means, standard deviations (SDs), and ranges were calculated by diagnostic category, as indicated by BI-RADS level. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to assess differences in readability and suitability by diagnostic category. RESULTS: The Flesch Kincaid score ranged from 7.7 to 13.5, with a mean of 10.2. The Lexile score ranged from 880 to 1270, with a mean of 1113. The mean SAM score ranged from 16% to 36%, with a mean of 29%. Mean grade level, Lexile score, and SAM score did not vary significantly by diagnostic category. No single document had an acceptable suitability score, and only two had acceptable Lexile scores. Common deficiencies included use of the passive voice, vague wording, and technical jargon. CONCLUSIONS: The letters we analyzed were written at levels too difficult for many patients to understand. Future investigations should explore clearer ways of communicating mammography results.