Supplemental Breast MR Imaging Screening of Women with Average Risk of Breast Cancer.

Purpose To investigate the utility and accuracy of breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging as a supplemental screening tool in women at average risk for breast cancer and to investigate the types of cancer detected with MR imaging screening. Materials and Methods This prospective observational study was conducted at two academic breast centers in women aged 40-70 years without breast cancer-associated risk factors (lifetime risk <15%). Between January 2005 and December 2013, women with at least minimal residual breast tissue (American College of Radiology categories A-D) and normal conventional imaging findings (screening mammography with or without screening ultrasonography [US]) were invited to undergo supplemental MR imaging screening. Outcome measures were supplemental cancer detection rates, interval cancer rates, and biologic profiles of MR imaging-detected additional cancers, as well as specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of MR imaging screening. Tissue diagnoses or 2 years of follow-up were used to establish the reference standard. Results A total of 2120 women were recruited and underwent 3861 screening MR imaging studies, covering an observation period of 7007 women-years. Breast MR imaging depicted 60 additional breast cancers (ductal carcinoma in situ, n = 20; invasive carcinoma, n = 40) for an overall supplemental cancer detection rate of 15.5 per 1000 cases (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.9, 20.0). Forty-eight additional cancers were detected with MR imaging at initial screening (supplemental cancer detection rate, 22.6 per 1000 cases). During the 1741 subsequent screening rounds, 12 of 13 incident cancers were found with MR imaging alone (supplemental cancer detection rate, 6.9 per 1000 cases). One cancer was diagnosed with all three methods (mammography, US, and MR imaging), and none were diagnosed with mammography only or US only. Cancers diagnosed with MR imaging were small (median, 8 mm), node negative in 93.4% of cases, and dedifferentiated (high-grade cancer) in 41.7% of cases at prevalence screening and 46.0% of cases at incidence screening. No interval cancers were observed. MR imaging screening offered high specificity (97.1%; 95% CI: 96.5, 97.6) and high PPV (35.7%; 95% CI: 28.9, 43.1). Conclusion In women at average risk for breast cancer, MR imaging screening improves early diagnosis of prognostically relevant breast cancer. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

[1]  Eun-Kyung Kim,et al.  Triple-negative invasive breast cancer on dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging: comparison with other breast cancer subtypes , 2012, European Radiology.

[2]  G. Farshid,et al.  Risk profile of breast cancer following atypical hyperplasia detected through organized screening. , 2015, Breast.

[3]  Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers , 2013, Breast Cancer Research.

[4]  A R Padhani,et al.  Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS) , 2005, The Lancet.

[5]  M. Yaffe,et al.  Long-term results of screening with magnetic resonance imaging in women with BRCA mutations , 2012, British Journal of Cancer.

[6]  T. Endo,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anti-cancer Randomized Trial (J-START): a randomised controlled trial , 2016, The Lancet.

[7]  P. Hall,et al.  Breast cancer genetic risk profile is differentially associated with interval and screen-detected breast cancers. , 2015, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[8]  Daniel B Kopans,et al.  The pattern of breast cancer screening utilization and its consequences , 2002, Cancer.

[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]  A Russell Localio,et al.  Multimodality screening of high-risk women: a prospective cohort study. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  Shu Ichihara,et al.  Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade , 2010, Breast Cancer Research.

[12]  Rebecca A Hubbard,et al.  Outcomes of screening mammography by frequency, breast density, and postmenopausal hormone therapy. , 2013, JAMA internal medicine.

[13]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  Overdiagnosis by mammographic screening for breast cancer studied in birth cohorts in The Netherlands , 2015, International journal of cancer.

[14]  Maximilian Reiser,et al.  Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[15]  Janice S. Sung,et al.  Screening breast MR imaging in women with a history of lobular carcinoma in situ. , 2011, Radiology.

[16]  Janice S. Sung,et al.  Screening breast MR imaging in women with a history of chest irradiation. , 2011, Radiology.

[17]  Laura Cortesi,et al.  Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. , 2007, Radiology.

[18]  C R Key,et al.  Biologic characteristics of interval and screen-detected breast cancers. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[19]  E. Halpern,et al.  A simple model of breast carcinoma growth may provide explanations for observations of apparently complex phenomena , 2003, Cancer.

[20]  Derek C. Radisky,et al.  Understanding the Premalignant Potential of Atypical Hyperplasia through Its Natural History: A Longitudinal Cohort Study , 2014, Cancer Prevention Research.

[21]  Brian L Sprague,et al.  Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts. , 2015, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[22]  M Moskowitz,et al.  Occult breast cancer: prevalence and radiographic detectability. , 1987, Radiology.

[23]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  N. Hylton,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of pathologic response in patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment for operable breast cancer , 2013, Cancer.

[25]  M. Gail,et al.  Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. , 1989, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[26]  T. Helbich,et al.  Triple-modality screening trial for familial breast cancer underlines the importance of magnetic resonance imaging and questions the role of mammography and ultrasound regardless of patient mutation status, age, and breast density. , 2015, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[27]  Phoebe E. Freer,et al.  Breast-density legislation--practical considerations. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  D. Miglioretti,et al.  Individual and Combined Effects of Age, Breast Density, and Hormone Replacement Therapy Use on the Accuracy of Screening Mammography , 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[29]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  Survival benefit in women with BRCA1 mutation or familial risk in the MRI screening study (MRISC) , 2015, International journal of cancer.

[30]  S. Duffy,et al.  Impact of Screening on Breast Cancer Mortality: The UK Program 20 Years On , 2015, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[31]  M. Leach,et al.  MRI breast screening in high-risk women: cancer detection and survival analysis , 2014, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[32]  C. Gatsonis,et al.  MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[33]  John Kornak,et al.  MRI Enhancement in Stromal Tissue Surrounding Breast Tumors: Association with Recurrence Free Survival following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy , 2013, PloS one.

[34]  John Kornak,et al.  Optimized breast MRI functional tumor volume as a biomarker of recurrence‐free survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy , 2014, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[35]  A. Ng,et al.  Breast cancer detection among young survivors of pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma with screening magnetic resonance imaging , 2014, Cancer.

[36]  Eugenio Paci,et al.  Overdiagnosis in Mammographic Screening for Breast Cancer in Europe: A Literature Review , 2012, Journal of medical screening.

[37]  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.

[38]  Ralf-Dieter Hilgers,et al.  Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

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

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