Breast cancer detected with screening US: reasons for nondetection at mammography.

PURPOSE To retrospectively review the mammograms of women with breast cancers detected at screening ultrasonography (US) to determine the reasons for nondetection at mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study received institutional review board approval, and informed consent was waived. Between 2003 and 2011, a retrospective database review revealed 335 US-depicted cancers in 329 women (median age, 47 years; age range, 29-69 years) with Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System breast density type 2-4. Five blinded radiologists independently reviewed the mammograms to determine whether the findings on negative mammograms should be recalled. Three unblinded radiologists re-reviewed the mammograms to determine the reasons for nondetection by using the reference location of the cancer on mammograms obtained after US-guided wire localization or breast magnetic resonance imaging. The number of cancers recalled by the blinded radiologists were compared with the reasons for nondetection determined by the unblinded radiologists. RESULTS Of the 335 US-depicted cancers, 63 (19%) were recalled by three or more of the five blinded radiologists, and 272 (81%) showed no mammographic findings that required immediate action. In the unblinded repeat review, 263 (78%) cancers were obscured by overlapping dense breast tissue, and nine (3%) were not included at mammography owing to difficult anatomic location or poor positioning. Sixty-three (19%) cancers were considered interpretive errors. Of these, 52 (82%) were seen as subtle findings (46 asymmetries, six calcifications) and 11 (18%) were evident (six focal asymmetries, one distortion, four calcifications). CONCLUSION Most breast cancers (81%) detected at screening US were not seen at mammography, even in retrospect. In addition, 19% had subtle or evident findings missed at mammography.

[1]  David A Mankoff,et al.  ACR Appropriateness Criteria Breast Cancer Screening. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[2]  W. Buchberger,et al.  Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. , 2000, Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR.

[3]  Walter Heindel,et al.  Digital mammography screening: how many breast cancers are additionally detected by bilateral ultrasound examination during assessment? , 2013, European Radiology.

[4]  B. Viták,et al.  Influence of review design on percentages of missed interval breast cancers: retrospective study of interval cancers in a population-based screening program. , 2005, Radiology.

[5]  N. Boyd,et al.  Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  C. D'Orsi,et al.  Diagnostic Performance of Digital Versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Jean B. Cormack,et al.  Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. , 2008, JAMA.

[8]  Stuart S Kaplan,et al.  Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. , 2001, Radiology.

[9]  Etta D Pisano,et al.  Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. , 2012, JAMA.

[10]  Enzo Galligioni,et al.  Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positives, and associated cost. , 2008, European journal of cancer.

[11]  R. Birdwell,et al.  Difficulties and errors in diagnosis of breast neoplasms. , 2012, Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR.

[12]  Debra M Ikeda,et al.  Analysis of 172 subtle findings on prior normal mammograms in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening. , 2003, Radiology.

[13]  P. Porter,et al.  Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[14]  J. Weigert,et al.  The Connecticut Experiment: The Role of Ultrasound in the Screening of Women With Dense Breasts , 2012, The breast journal.

[15]  Woo Kyung Moon,et al.  Multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral breast cancers: bilateral whole-breast US in the preoperative evaluation of patients. , 2002, Radiology.

[16]  T. M. Kolb,et al.  Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. , 2002, Radiology.

[17]  W. Moon,et al.  Features of prospectively overlooked computer-aided detection marks on prior screening digital mammograms in women with breast cancer. , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  L. Fajardo,et al.  Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. 1993 ARRS President's Award. , 1993, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  P. Huynh,et al.  The false-negative mammogram. , 1998, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[20]  Baudouin Maldague,et al.  Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[21]  L. Philpotts,et al.  Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. , 2012, Radiology.

[22]  Solveig Hofvind,et al.  Breast cancer: missed interval and screening-detected cancer at full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography-- results from a retrospective review. , 2012, Radiology.

[23]  S. Feig,et al.  Screening for cancer: when is it valid?--Lessons from the mammography experience. , 2003, Radiology.

[24]  C. Kuhl,et al.  Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. , 2008, Radiology.

[25]  S. Ciatto,et al.  Interval breast cancers in screening: the effect of mammography review method on classification. , 2007, Breast.

[26]  Markus Hahn,et al.  Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue. A systematic review , 2009, BMC Cancer.

[27]  L. Bassett,et al.  Digital mammography: clinical image evaluation. , 2010, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[28]  Pavel Crystal,et al.  Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[29]  D. Ikeda,et al.  Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. , 2001, Radiology.

[30]  Jennifer A Harvey,et al.  Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. , 2004, Radiology.