Suspicious Findings at Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Occult to Conventional Digital Mammography: Imaging Features and Pathology Findings

To review the imaging and pathologic features of a series of lesions detected at digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), which are occult to conventional digital mammography (DM). We retrospectively reviewed 268 consecutive breast imaging reporting and data system 4 and 5 lesions imaged with both DM and DBT at our facility from July 2012 through April 2013. For each lesion, we recorded the mammographic finding, breast density, mode of biopsy, and pathology results. A total of 19 lesions were identified at DBT that were occult to DM. Sixty three percent (12/19) of these lesions were identified in dense breasts. Architectural distortion was seen in 74% (14/19) of cases and spiculated masses accounted for the remaining 26% (5/19). The positive predictive value of biopsy was 53% (10/19). Seven cases were infiltrating ductal carcinomas and three were infiltrating lobular carcinomas. High‐risk lesions accounted for 47% (9/19) of the lesions, the majority of which were radial scars 67% (6/9). Eighty four percent (16/19) of the lesions underwent ultrasound guided core biopsy while the remainder underwent magnetic resonance imaging guided core biopsy. DBT may demonstrate suspicious lesions that are occult to DM, particularly in women with dense breasts. Such lesions have a high likelihood of malignancy and warrant biopsy.

[1]  J. Cawson,et al.  Fourteen‐gauge needle core biopsy of mammographically evident radial scars , 2003, Cancer.

[2]  M. Yaffe,et al.  American Cancer Society Guidelines for Breast Screening with MRI as an Adjunct to Mammography , 2007, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[3]  I. Andersson,et al.  Invasive lobular carcinoma: mammographic findings in a 10-year experience. , 1991, Radiology.

[4]  K. Krecke,et al.  Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic findings and extent of disease at diagnosis in 184 patients. , 1993, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

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

[6]  Emily F Conant,et al.  Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. , 2014, JAMA.

[7]  L J Yeoman,et al.  Screening interval breast cancers: mammographic features and prognosis factors. , 1996, Radiology.

[8]  M. Mainiero,et al.  Detection of mammographically occult architectural distortion on digital breast tomosynthesis screening: initial clinical experience. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  C. Zuiani,et al.  Radial scars without atypia diagnosed at imaging-guided needle biopsy: how often is associated malignancy found at subsequent surgical excision, and do mammography and sonography predict which lesions are malignant? , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  G. Bornet,et al.  Stereotactic Vacuum‐Assisted Biopsies on a Digital Breast 3D‐Tomosynthesis System , 2013, The breast journal.

[11]  B. Anderson,et al.  Trends in incidence rates of invasive lobular and ductal breast carcinoma. , 2003, JAMA.

[12]  Madhavi Raghu,et al.  Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. , 2013, Radiology.

[13]  Jessica W T Leung,et al.  The California breast density information group: a collaborative response to the issues of breast density, breast cancer risk, and breast density notification legislation. , 2013, Radiology.

[14]  KM Harris,et al.  Infiltrating lobular carcinoma: mammographic patterns with pathologic correlation. , 1989, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  Simone Schrading,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: initial experiences and comparison with prone stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy. , 2015, Radiology.

[16]  Andriy I. Bandos,et al.  Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. , 2013, Radiology.

[17]  S. Ciatto,et al.  Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. , 2013, The Lancet. Oncology.

[18]  G. Farr,et al.  Radial scar of the breast: radiologic-pathologic correlation in 22 cases. , 1999, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[19]  A. Douglas-Jones,et al.  Radial scar lesions of the breast diagnosed by needle core biopsy: analysis of cases containing occult malignancy , 2006, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[20]  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.

[21]  W. P. Evans,et al.  Percutaneous core needle biopsy of radial scars of the breast: when is excision necessary? , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[22]  S. Rose,et al.  Implementation of breast tomosynthesis in a routine screening practice: an observational study. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.