Annual screening strategies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers: a comparative effectiveness analysis

Framework for Successful Integration of Health Services Research Into a Breast Imaging Career

Health services research (HSR) is a multidisciplinary field of inquiry that examines how health care is structured, providing valuable data on health care outcomes and delivery. Over the past few decades, a shift in the U.S. health care system toward value-based care has placed a priority on health services topics. Health services research has been central to the evolution of breast imaging over this period, with increased emphasis placed on the following: (1) design of appropriate-use criteria for imaging services; (2) determination of cost-effectiveness of imaging protocols and screening regimens guiding policy; and (3) evaluation of policy related to reimbursement for diagnostic imaging and image-guided procedures. Examples of HSR topics that can be applied directly to breast imaging include evaluation of health care availability and accessibility, analysis of health care use patterns, exploration of patient preferences, assessment of technological innovation, development and implementation of clinical practice guidelines and screening strategies, and examination of health care organization and delivery models. Breast imaging radiologists who perform HSR are uniquely positioned to advocate for patients, to promote transformative health care interventions, and to influence policy changes and public health initiatives in breast imaging through analysis of health care data and translation of their research findings. In this Training and Professional Development article, we aim to provide practical approaches to explore interest in HSR and to describe a framework for successful integration of HSR into a breast imaging career.

Long Axial Field-of-View PET/CT Could Answer Unmet Needs in Gynecological Cancers

Gynecological malignancies currently affect about 3.5 million women all over the world. Imaging of uterine, cervical, vaginal, ovarian, and vulvar cancer still presents several unmet needs when using conventional modalities such as ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance, and standard positron emission tomography (PET)/CT. Some of the current diagnostic limitations are represented by differential diagnosis between inflammatory and cancerous findings, detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis and metastases <1 cm, detection of cancer-associated vascular complications, effective assessment of post-therapy changes, as well as bone metabolism and osteoporosis assessment. As a result of recent advances in PET/CT instrumentation, new systems now offer a long-axial field-of-view (LAFOV) to image between 106 cm and 194 cm (i.e., total-body PET) of the patient's body simultaneously and feature higher physical sensitivity and spatial resolution compared to standard PET/CT systems. LAFOV PET could overcome the forementioned limitations of conventional imaging and provide valuable global disease assessment, allowing for improved patient-tailored care. This article provides a comprehensive overview of these and other potential applications of LAFOV PET/CT imaging for patients with gynecological malignancies.

Health Benefits and Cost-Effectiveness of Children's Oncology Group Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines for Chest-Irradiated Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the Children's Oncology Group Guideline recommendation for breast cancer (BC) screening using mammography (MAM) and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in female chest-irradiated childhood Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), increasingly replacing MAM in practice, was also examined.

METHODS

Life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), BC mortality, health care costs, and false-positive screen frequencies of undergoing annual MAM, DBT, MRI, MAM + MRI, and DBT + MRI from age 25 to 74 years were estimated by microsimulation. BC risks and non-BC mortality were estimated from female 5-year survivors of HL in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study and the US population. Test performance of MAM and MRI was synthesized from HL studies, and that of DBT from the general population. Costs (2017 US dollars [USD]) and utility weights were obtained from the medical literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated.

RESULTS

With 100% screening adherence, annual BC screening extended LYs by 0.34-0.46 years over no screening. If the willingness-to-pay threshold to gain a quality-adjusted LY was ICER < $100,000 USD, annual MAM at age 25-74 years was the only cost-effective strategy. When nonadherence was taken into consideration, only annual MAM at age 30-74 years (ICER = $56,972 USD) was cost-effective. Supplementing annual MAM with MRI costing $545 USD was not cost-effective under either adherence condition. If MRI costs were reduced to $300 USD, adding MRI to annual MAM at age 30-74 years could become more cost-effective, particularly in the reduced adherence condition (ICER = $133,682 USD).

CONCLUSION

Annual BC screening using MAM at age 30-74 years is effective and cost-effective in female chest-irradiated HL survivors. Although annual adjunct MRI is not cost-effective at $545 USD cost, it could become cost-effective as MRI cost is reduced, a plausible scenario with the emergent use of abbreviated MRI.

From the patient to the population: Use of genomics for population screening

Genomic medicine is expanding from a focus on diagnosis at the patient level to prevention at the population level given the ongoing under-ascertainment of high-risk and actionable genetic conditions using current strategies, particularly hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), Lynch Syndrome (LS) and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). The availability of large-scale next-generation sequencing strategies and preventive options for these conditions makes it increasingly feasible to screen pre-symptomatic individuals through public health-based approaches, rather than restricting testing to high-risk groups. This raises anew, and with urgency, questions about the limits of screening as well as the moral authority and capacity to screen for genetic conditions at a population level. We aimed to answer some of these critical questions by using the WHO Wilson and Jungner criteria to guide a synthesis of current evidence on population genomic screening for HBOC, LS, and FH.

Training promotores to lead virtual hereditary breast cancer education sessions for Spanish-speaking individuals of Latin American heritage in California

Background

Awareness about hereditary breast cancer and the preventative steps to minimize disease risk is lower in Hispanic/Latina individuals than non-Hispanic White women in the United States. For this reason, we developed a promotor-based hereditary breast cancer education and risk identification program for self-identified Hispanic/Latina women, which included training promotores in basic genetics and hereditary breast cancer. This study explored promotores’ experiences receiving training and participating in virtual practice sessions as well as changes in knowledge about hereditary breast cancer.

Methods

A total of ten promotores underwent a two-week basic training led by the promotores organization and an eight-hour in person hereditary breast cancer training workshop. Demographic information along with pre- and post-training surveys were completed by ten promotores who participated in the training workshop. Surveys were given to determine changes in knowledge of hereditary breast cancer and genetics. Of the ten promotores, two were selected to lead community education sessions and participated in 6 semi-structured interviews. All interviews and practice sessions were conducted using a virtual platform.

Results

The data revealed that after the 8-h workshop and practice sessions, promotores felt confident about their ability to conduct virtual education sessions with the community. Interviews identified key facilitators to success such as a supportive environment, practice presentations, and personal motivation. Learning the online platform was considered the biggest challenge by the promotores, as opposed to learning complex genetics topics.

Conclusions

These results provide further evidence supporting promotores’ willingness and ability to provide health education on relatively complex topics. It also offers insight into the challenges of presenting information to vulnerable populations using an online platform and the additional support that is required to ensure a positive outcome.

The Breast Cancer Screening and Timing of Breast MRI—Experience in a Genetic High-Risk Screening Clinic in a Comprehensive Cancer Center

For women with genetic risk of breast cancer, the addition of screening breast MRI to mammography has become a standard. The order and interval of annual imaging can be variable among providers. To evaluate the clinical implications related to the timing, we conducted a chart review on a cohort of women (N = 276) with high-risk (BRCA1, BRCA2, CDH1, PTEN and TP53) and moderate high-risk (ATM and CHEK2) predisposition to breast cancer in a 48-month follow up. The estimated MRI detection rate in the entire group is 1.75% (18 per 1000 MRI tests). For the high-risk group, the estimated rate is 2.98% (30 per 1000 MRI tests). Many women discovered their genetic risk at an age much older (average age of the high-risk group was 48 years) than the age recommended to initiate enhanced screening (age 20 to 25 years). In total, 4 of the 11 primary breast cancers detected were identified by screening MRI within the first month after initial visit, which were not detected by previous mammography, suggesting the benefit of initiating MRI immediately after the discovery of genetic risk. Breast screening findings for women with Lynch syndrome and neurofibromatosis type 1 were also included in this report.

Does contrast-enhanced mammography have an impact on the detection of cancer in patients with risk of developing breast cancer?

Background

Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) has been discovered to be more sensitive and specific than two-dimensional full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in both screening and diagnostic settings. The aim of the study was to assess the additive role of CEM in the detection and characterization of breast lesions in women with increased risk of developing breast cancer. This prospective study included 283 female patients with increased risk of developing breast cancer (i.e., positive family history of breast cancer, personal history of breast cancer, and heterogeneously dense mammary parenchyma) coming for either screening (n = 127/283 (49.1%)) or diagnostic (n = 156/283 (55.1%)) purpose. All patients had FFDM and CEM done, and the findings were evaluated independently; final Breast Imaging Reporting And Data System (BIRADS) classification was given for each modality. Results were then compared with histopathology or ultrasound findings with routine follow-up for normal and typically benign findings.

Results

In this study, 283 women with mean age of 48 were enrolled. Among the studied cases regardless to a specific risk factor, 15/283 (5.3%) were diagnosed as normal, 13/283 (4.6%) as inflammatory lesions, 72/283(25.4%) as benign lesions, 6/283 (2.1%) as benign precancerous lesions, and 177/283 (62.5%) as malignant. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the CEM were 92.7 and 71.43 %, respectively, while FFDM were 80.90 and 59.05%, respectively.

Conclusion

Contrast-enhanced mammography is a valuable screening and diagnostic imaging modality in patients with increased risk of developing breast cancer with diagnostic indices higher than mammography resulting in a significantly higher cancer detection rate.

A Review of Breast Cancer Risk Factors in Adolescents and Young Adults

Simple Summary

Cancer diagnosed in patients between the ages of 15 and 39 deserves special consideration. Diagnoses within this cohort of adolescents and young adults include childhood cancers which present at an older age than expected, or an early presentation of cancers that are typically observed in older adults, such as breast cancer. Cancers within this age group are associated with worse disease-free and overall survival rates, and the incidence of these cases are rising. Knowing an individual’s susceptibility to disease can change their clinical management and allow for the risk-testing of relatives. This review discusses the risk factors that contribute to breast cancer in this unique cohort of patients, including inherited genetic risk factors, as well as environmental and lifestyle factors. We also describe risk models that allow clinicians to quantify a patient’s lifetime risk of developing disease.

Abstract

Cancer in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) deserves special consideration for several reasons. AYA cancers encompass paediatric malignancies that present at an older age than expected, or early-onset of cancers that are typically observed in adults. However, disease diagnosed in the AYA population is distinct to those same cancers which are diagnosed in a paediatric or older adult setting. Worse disease-free and overall survival outcomes are observed in the AYA setting, and the incidence of AYA cancers is increasing. Knowledge of an individual’s underlying cancer predisposition can influence their clinical care and may facilitate early tumour surveillance strategies and cascade testing of at-risk relatives. This information can further influence reproductive decision making. In this review we discuss the risk factors contributing to AYA breast cancer, such as heritable predisposition, environmental, and lifestyle factors. We also describe a number of risk models which incorporate genetic factors that aid clinicians in quantifying an individual’s lifetime risk of disease.

The Role of Imaging in Health Screening: Screening for Specific Conditions

There are well-established and emerging screening examinations aimed at identifying malignant and nonmalignant conditions at early, treatable stages. The Radiology Research Alliance's "Role of Imaging in Health Screening" Task Force provides a comprehensive review of specific imaging-based screening examinations. This work reviews and serves as a reference for screening examinations for breast and colon cancer in a healthy population along with screening for lung cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and the use of whole body magnetic resonance imaging in at-risk individuals. American College of Radiology scoring systems, along with case-based examples, are included to illustrate the different disease entities. The future of screening is discussed, particularly in the context of artificial intelligence.

Breast Cancer Screening with Abbreviated Breast MRI: 3-year Outcome Analysis

Background Data are limited regarding the performance of abbreviated screening breast MRI during consecutive years and the characteristics of breast cancers missed and detected with it. Purpose To assess the longitudinal diagnostic performance of abbreviated screening MRI and to determine whether the screening outcomes of abbreviated MRI differed between yearly time periods for 3 consecutive years. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 1975 consecutive women who underwent abbreviated screening MRI between September 2015 and August 2018. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories 3-5 defined positive results, and BI-RADS categories 1-2 defined negative results. Cancer detection rate (CDR), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), and interval cancer rate were assessed annually. Yearly performance measures were compared with the Fisher exact test by using the permutation method. Clinical-pathologic and imaging characteristics of the missed and detected cancers were compared by using the Fisher exact test and the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Results A total of 1975 women (median age, 49 years; interquartile range, 44-56 years) underwent 3037 abbreviated MRI examinations over 3 years. CDR (year 1 to year 3, 6.9-10.7 per 1000 examinations), positive predictive value for recall (9.7% [six of 62] to 15.6% [12 of 77]), positive predictive value for biopsy (31.6% [six of 19] to 63.2% [12 of 19]), sensitivity (75.0% [six of eight] to 80.0% [12 of 15]), and specificity (93.5% [807 of 863] to 94.1% [1041 of 1106]) were highest in year 3, and AIR (7.1% [62 of 871] to 6.9% [77 of 1121]) was lowest in year 3. However, all outcome measures did not differ statistically between years 1, 2, and 3 (all P > .05). The interval cancer rate was 0.66 per 1000 examinations (two of 3037). Thirty-eight breast cancers were identified in 36 women; 29 were detected with abbreviated MRI, but nine were missed. Of these, seven were detected with other imaging modalities after negative results at the last screening MRI examination, and two were interval cancers. All missed cancers were node-negative early-stage invasive cancers and were smaller (median size, 0.8 cm vs 1.2 cm; P = .01) than detected cancers. Conclusion Screening outcome measures of abbreviated MRI were sustained without significant differences between 3 consecutive years. All cancers missed at abbreviated MRI were node-negative invasive cancers and tended to be smaller than detected cancers. © RSNA, 2021 See also the editorial by Lee in this issue. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer and recommended approaches to genetic testing/counseling and management strategies in individuals with these pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. This manuscript focuses on cancer risk and risk management for BRCA-related breast/ovarian cancer syndrome and Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Carriers of a BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant have an excessive risk for both breast and ovarian cancer that warrants consideration of more intensive screening and preventive strategies. There is also evidence that risks of prostate cancer and pancreatic cancer are elevated in these carriers. Li-Fraumeni syndrome is a highly penetrant cancer syndrome associated with a high lifetime risk for cancer, including soft tissue sarcomas, osteosarcomas, premenopausal breast cancer, colon cancer, gastric cancer, adrenocortical carcinoma, and brain tumors.

Optimal Screening in Breast Cancer Survivors With Dense Breasts on Mammography

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.

Screening in patients with increased risk of breast cancer (part 2). Where are we now? Actual MRI screening controversies

For women with a high risk of breast cancer, early detection plays an important role. Due to the high incidence of breast cancer, and at a younger age than in the general population, screening begins earlier, and there is considerable evidence that magnetic resonance is the most sensitive diagnostic tool, and the principal American and European guidelines agree on the recommendation to perform annual magnetic resonance (with supplemental annual mammography) as an optimal mode of screening. In addition to the absence of current consensus on which patients should be included in the recommendation for magnetic resonance screening (widely discussed in the introduction of part 1 of this work), there are other aspects that are different between guidelines, that are not specified, or that are susceptible to change based on the evidence of several years of experience, that we have called «controversies», such as the age to begin screening, the possible advisability of using a different strategy in different subgroups, performing alternate versus synchronous magnetic resonance and mammography, the age at which to terminate the two techniques, or how to follow up after risk reduction surgery.The aim of the second part of the paper is, by reviewing the literature, to provide an update in relation to some of the main «controversies» in high risk screening with magnetic resonance. And finally, based on all this, to propose a possible model of optimal and updated screening protocol.

Age-Specific Breast Density Changes in Taiwanese Women: A Cross-Sectional Study

Breast density is a risk factor for breast cancer. This study explored distribution of mammographic density quantitatively and qualitatively in a wide age range of Taiwanese women. Subjects with negative and benign mammographic findings were included. According to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, the proportion of extremely dense breasts declined from 58.0% in women < 30 years to 1.9% in women > 74 years. More than 80% of mammograms in women < 55 years old were classified as extremely or heterogeneously dense, while the proportion of dense breasts was still high in women aged 60–64 years (59.3%). The absolute dense area of the breast declined from 35.8% in women < 30 years to 18.5% in women > 74 years. The correlation between breast density and age was significant, with and without controlling for the effect of body composition (p < 0.001), implying that the relationship between breast density and age was not wholly related to body composition. In conclusion, the higher breast density in Taiwanese women aged 60–64 years was comparable to that of Western women aged 40–44 years in the literature. This suggests that breast cancer screening using mammography may be more challenging for Asian women than for Western women of the same age.

Oncologic Safety of Prophylactic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in a Population With BRCA Mutations: A Multi-institutional Study

Importance

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) offers superior cosmetic outcomes and has been gaining wide acceptance; however, its role among patients with BRCA mutations remains controversial.

Objective

To report on the oncologic safety of NSM and provide evidence-based data to patients and health care professionals regarding preservation of the nipple-areolar complex during a risk-reducing mastectomy in a population with BRCA mutations.

Design, Setting, and Participants

We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of 9 institutions' experience with prophylactic NSM from 1968 to 2013 in a cohort of patients with BRCA mutations. Patients with breast cancer were included if they underwent contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy; however, only the prophylactic side was considered in the analysis. Patients found to have an occult primary breast cancer at the time of risk-reducing mastectomy, those having variant(s) of unknown significance, and those undergoing free nipple grafts were excluded.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome measure was development of a new breast cancer after risk-reducing NSM. Three reference data sources were used to model the expected number of events, and this was compared with our observed number of events.

Results

A total of 548 risk-reducing NSMs in 346 patients were performed at 9 institutions. The median age at NSM was 41 years (interquartile range, 34.5-47.5 years). Bilateral prophylactic NSMs were performed in 202 patients (58.4%), and 144 patients (41.6%) underwent a unilateral risk-reducing NSM secondary to cancer in the contralateral breast. Overall, 201 patients with BRCA1 mutations and 145 with BRCA2 mutations were included. With median and mean follow-up of 34 and 56 months, respectively, no ipsilateral breast cancers occurred after prophylactic NSM. Breast cancer did not develop in any patients undergoing bilateral risk-reducing NSMs. Using risk models for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, approximately 22 new primary breast cancers were expected without prophylactic NSM. Prophylactic NSM resulted in a significant reduction in breast cancer events (test of observed vs expected events, P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

Nipple-sparing mastectomies are highly preventive against breast cancer in a BRCA population. Although the follow-up remains relatively short, NSM should be offered as a breast cancer risk-reducing strategy to appropriate patients with BRCA mutations.

Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer

BackgroundContrast agent-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) has been shown to be more sensitive and specific than two-dimensional full-field digital mammography in the diagnostic setting. Few studies have reported on its performance in the screening setting.PurposeTo evaluate the performance of CEDM for breast cancer screening.Materials and MethodsThis retrospective study included women who underwent dual-energy CEDM for breast cancer screening from December 2012 through April 2016. Medical records were reviewed for age, risk factors, short-interval follow-up and biopsies recommended, and cancers detected. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value of abnormal findings at screening (PPV₁), positive predictive value of biopsy performed (PPV₃), and negative predictive value were determined.ResultsIn the study period 904 baseline CEDMs were performed. Mean age was 51.8 years ± 9.4 (standard deviation). Of 904 patients, 700 (77.4%) had dense breasts, 247 (27.3%) had a family history of breast cancer in a first-degree relative age 50 years or younger, and 363 (40.2%) a personal history of breast cancer. The final Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System score was 1 or 2 in 832 of 904 (92.0%) patients, score of 3 in 25 of 904 (2.8%) patients, and score of 4 or 5 in 47 of 904 (5.2%) patients. By using CEDM, 15 cancers were diagnosed in 14 of 904 women (cancer detection rate, 15.5 of 1000). PPV₃ was 29.4% (15 of 51). At least 1-year follow up was available in 858 women. There were two interval cancers. Sensitivity was 50.0% (eight of 16; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.7%, 75.3%) on the low-energy images compared with 87.5% (14 of 16; 95% CI: 61.7%, 98.4%) for the entire study (low-energy and iodine images; P = .03). Specificity was 93.7% (789 of 842; 95% CI: 91.8%, 95.2%); PPV₁ was 20.9% (14 of 67; 95% CI: 11.9%, 32.6%), and negative predictive value was 99.7% (789 of 791; 95% CI: 99.09%, 99.97%).ConclusionContrast-enhanced digital mammography is a promising technique for screening women with higher-than-average risk for breast cancer.© RSNA, 2019.

Why the Gold Standard Approach by Mammography Demands Extension by Multiomics? Application of Liquid Biopsy miRNA Profiles to Breast Cancer Disease Management

In the global context, the epidemic of breast cancer (BC) is evident for the early 21st century. Evidence shows that national mammography screening programs have sufficiently reduced BC related mortality. Therefore, the great utility of the mammography-based screening is not an issue. However, both false positive and false negative BC diagnosis, excessive biopsies, and irradiation linked to mammography application, as well as sub-optimal mammography-based screening, such as in the case of high-dense breast tissue in young females, altogether increase awareness among the experts regarding the limitations of mammography-based screening. Severe concerns regarding the mammography as the “golden standard” approach demanding complementary tools to cover the evident deficits led the authors to present innovative strategies, which would sufficiently improve the quality of the BC management and services to the patient. Contextually, this article provides insights into mammography deficits and current clinical data demonstrating the great potential of non-invasive diagnostic tools utilizing circulating miRNA profiles as an adjunct to conventional mammography for the population screening and personalization of BC management.

Cancer screening and prevention in BRCA mutation carriers: a missed opportunity?

While the elevated lifetime risk of breast and ovarian cancer is well recognised for patients with a BRCA mutation, the implementation of effective risk reduction strategies has been fraught with challenges. This report from an international database and published in the British Journal of Cancer reveals suboptimal rates of utilisation of surveillance/preventative measures globally.

BRCA Mutation Carriers: Breast and Ovarian Cancer Screening Guidelines and Imaging Considerations

Patients who carry the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations have an underlying genetic predisposition for breast and ovarian cancers. These deleterious genetic mutations are the most common genes implicated in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. This monograph summarizes the evidence behind current screening recommendations, reviews imaging protocols specific to this patient population, and illustrates some of the imaging nuances of breast and ovarian cancers in this clinical setting.

The clinical impact of MRI screening for BRCA mutation carriers: the first report in Japan

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the appropriate surveillance for high-risk women with breast cancer in Japan. We investigated their imaging features and pathological characteristics to build a proper surveillance system for asymptomatic high-risk individuals in the future.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 93 female (median age 43 years) BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers from our institutional clinical database from 2011 to 2017. The study population was composed of 112 breast cancers. Mammography and MRI were reviewed by examiners blinded to patients' clinical history. Final surgical or biopsy histopathology served as the reference standard in all the patients.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine breast cancers met selection criteria; of these, 30 were BRCA1-associated tumors, and 29 were BRCA2-associated tumors. Invasive ductal carcinoma was the most prevalent type in both BRCA1 and BRCA2. There were statistically significant differences in phenotype, nuclear grade, and Ki-67 labeling index between BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Additionally, imaging findings on mammography and MRI were statistically different. Tumors in BRCA2 carriers demonstrated mammographic calcifications more frequently, while those in BRCA1 carriers demonstrated a mass or architectural distortion (P < 0.001). Enhancement pattern on MRI also significantly differed between the two subgroups (P = 0.006). The size of MRI-detected lesions was statistically smaller than the size of those detected by other modalities (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

The imaging and histological characteristics of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers were consistent with other countries' studies. MRI-detected lesions were significantly smaller than lesions detected by non-MRI modality. All lesions in BRCA1 mutation carriers could be detected by MRI.

Differences between screen-detected and interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers

BACKGROUND

BRCA mutation carriers have an elevated lifetime breast cancer risk and remain at risk for interval cancer development. We sought to compare BRCA mutation carriers with screen-detected versus interval breast cancers.

METHODS

Women with a known BRCA mutation prior to a breast cancer diagnosis were identified. Clinical and pathologic factors, and imaging within 18 months of diagnosis were compared among screen-detected versus interval cancers. Interval cancers were those detected by physical exam among women undergoing regular screening.

RESULTS

Of 124 breast cancers, 92 were screen and 22 clinically detected, of which 11 were interval cancers among regular screeners, and 10 were incidentally found on prophylactic mastectomy. Women with interval cancers were younger, had lower body mass indexes, and were more likely to be Black than those with screen-detected cancers (p < 0.05). Interval cancers were all invasive, larger, more likely to be node positive, and more likely to require axillary lymph node dissection and chemotherapy (p < 0.05). No significant differences were seen by BRCA mutation, mammographic density, MRI background parenchymal enhancement, tumor grade, or receptor status between cohorts. Women screened with both mammogram and MRI had significantly lower proportions of interval cancers compared to women screened with only mammogram or MRI alone (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers have worse clinicopathologic features than screen-detected tumors, and require more-aggressive medical and surgical therapy. Imaging with mammogram and MRI is associated with lower interval cancer development and should be utilized among this high-risk population.

Abbreviated MRI of the Breast: Does It Provide Value?

MRI of the breast is the most sensitive test for breast cancer detection and outperforms conventional imaging with mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, or ultrasound. However, the long scan time and relatively high costs limit its widespread use. Hence, it is currently only routinely implemented in the screening of women at an increased risk of breast cancer. To overcome these limitations, abbreviated dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE)‐MRI protocols have been introduced that substantially shorten image acquisition and interpretation time while maintaining a high diagnostic accuracy. Efforts to develop abbreviated MRI protocols reflect the increasing scrutiny of the disproportionate contribution of radiology to the rising overall healthcare expenditures. Healthcare policy makers are now focusing on curbing the use of advanced imaging examinations such as MRI while continuing to promote the quality and appropriateness of imaging. An important cornerstone of value‐based healthcare defines value as the patient's outcome over costs. Therefore, the concept of a fast, abbreviated MRI exam is very appealing, given its high diagnostic accuracy coupled with the possibility of a marked reduction in the cost of an MRI examination. Given recent concerns about gadolinium‐based contrast agents, unenhanced MRI techniques such as diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) are also being investigated for breast cancer diagnosis. Although further larger prospective studies, standardized imaging protocol, and reproducibility studies are necessary, initial results with abbreviated MRI protocols suggest that it seems feasible to offer screening breast DCE‐MRI to a broader population. This article aims to give an overview of abbreviated and fast breast MRI protocols, their utility for breast cancer detection, and their emerging role in the new value‐based healthcare paradigm that has replaced the fee‐for‐service model.

Level of Evidence: 1

Technical Efficacy: Stage 2

J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:e85–e100.

Breast Cancer Genetics and Indications for Prophylactic Mastectomy

As more genetic information becomes available to inform breast cancer treatment, screening, and risk-reduction approaches, clinicians must become more knowledgeable about possible genetic testing and prevention strategies, including outcomes, benefits, risks, and limitations. The aim of this article is to define and distinguish high- and moderate-risk breast cancer predisposition genes, summarize the clinical recommendations that may be considered based on the identification of pathogenic variants (mutations) in these genes, and indications for risk-reducing and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.

Genetics of pancreatic cancer and implications for therapy

Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal disease with a dismal 5-year prognosis. Knowledge of its genetics may help in identifying new methods for patient screening, and cancer treatment. In this review, we will describe the most common mutations responsible for the genesis of pancreatic cancer and their impact on screening, patterns of disease progression, and therapy.

Abnormal Findings Detected by Multi-modality Breast Imaging and Biopsy Results in a High-risk Clinic

BACKGROUND

High-risk BRCA mutation carriers are offered a surveillance scheme aimed at early detection of breast cancer. Although the efficacy of this scheme in breast cancer detection is well-established, the rate of breast cancer diagnosis of radiologically suspicious lesions and the effect of this screening scheme on breast cancer grade and stage are less well-defined.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Female BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers who were cancer-free at the beginning of follow-up at the Meirav High-risk Clinic, Sheba Medical Center, were eligible. Radiological imaging data (mammography, ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System scores), and histopathologic data on breast biopsies were retrieved.

RESULTS

Overall, 1055 women participated in the study; 760 (72%) were Ashkenazim, 661 (62.6%) were BRCA1 mutation carriers, the mean age at first visit was 44.1 ± 11.8 years, and there was a mean follow-up of 6.2 years. All participants underwent 6641 breast imaging tests: 2613 magnetic resonance imagings, 2662 breast ultrasounds, and 1366 mammograms. Overall, 295 biopsies were performed on 254 women: 82 (27%) biopsies on 79 women were diagnosed with breast cancer, including ductal carcinoma in situ: invasive breast cancer was diagnosed in 58 (70.7%), of whom 36 (62% of invasive cancer) were grade 3, and all but 10 were stage 1 to 2. Benign findings were noted in 213 biopsies performed on 175 women, with fibrocystic disease (n = 134; 62.9%) or fibroadenoma (n = 60; 28.16%) most commonly diagnosed.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to a breast cancer surveillance scheme enables breast cancer detection at an early stage but at advanced grade. Most biopsies (72%) performed in this high-risk clinic are benign.

Breast Cancer Genetics for Plastic Surgeons

Multidisciplinary genetic clinics offer counseling and testing to those who meet criteria for familial breast cancer, and plastic surgeons become integral to this process when risk-reducing surgery and postmastectomy reconstruction are deemed appropriate. As reconstructive surgeons, it is important that plastic surgeons are aware of the risks and issues associated with the genetic variants that cause patients to present for prophylactic or therapeutic surgery.

Clinical Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Technique, Indications, and Future Applications

Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive imaging modality for the detection of breast cancer, and it is indicated for breast cancer screening in patients at high-risk of developing breast cancer. It is limited to this group given the high cost. In addition, breast MRI is also indicated for evaluating the extent of disease in patients with new breast cancer diagnoses, monitoring the response to neoadjuvant treatment, and evaluating implant integrity. New promising innovations in breast MRI include fast abbreviated MRI, and functional techniques including diffusion-weighted imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy are promising particularly as regards to treatment response.

Familial pancreatic cancer: Concept, management and issues

Familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) is broadly defined as two first-degree-relatives with pancreatic cancer (PC) and accounts for 4%-10% of PC. Several genetic syndromes, including Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, hereditary pancreatitis, hereditary breast-ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), Lynch syndrome, and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), also have increased risks of PC, but the narrowest definition of FPC excludes these known syndromes. When compared with other familial tumors, proven genetic alterations are limited to a small proportion (< 20%) and the familial aggregation is usually modest. However, an ethnic deviation (Ashkenazi Jewish > Caucasian) and a younger onset are common also in FPC. In European countries, “anticipation” is reported in FPC families, as with other hereditary syndromes; a trend toward younger age and worse prognosis is recognized in the late years. The resected pancreases of FPC kindred often show multiple pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) foci, with various K-ras mutations, similar to colorectal polyposis seen in the FAP patients. As with HBOC patients, a patient who is a BRCA mutation carrier with unresectable pancreatic cancer (accounting for 0%-19% of FPC patients) demonstrated better outcome following platinum and Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor treatment. Western countries have established FPC registries since the 1990s and several surveillance projects for high-risk individuals are now ongoing to detect early PCs. Improvement in lifestyle habits, including non-smoking, is recommended for individuals at risk. In Japan, the FPC study group was initiated in 2013 and the Japanese FPC registry was established in 2014 by the Japan Pancreas Society.

Breast Cancer Screening for High-Risk Patients of Different Ages and Risk - Which Modality Is Most Effective?

While the guidelines for breast cancer screening in average-risk women are well established, screening in high-risk women is not as clear. For women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, current guidelines recommend screening by clinical breast examination and mammography starting at age 30. For certain high-risk women, additional screening with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is encouraged. This review focuses on differentiating imaging modalities used for screening women at high-risk for breast cancer over the age of 50 by discussing the different imaging techniques, cost versus benefit, detection rates, and impact on survival. While mammography is the only imaging modality proven to reduce mortality from breast cancer, MRI is more sensitive in identifying cancers. MRI can often identify smaller malignancies at a greater resolution at an earlier stage. The use of MRI would be more cost effective as there would be less need for invasive therapeutic procedures. Research thus far has not identified an age-specific preference in imaging modality. There are no guidelines for high-risk women that specify screening with respect to age (i.e., older than 50 years old). More research is needed before screening guidelines in different age groups with various risk factors can be established.

Breast Cancers Detected at Screening MR Imaging and Mammography in Patients at High Risk: Method of Detection Reflects Tumor Histopathologic Results

Purpose To compare the clinical, imaging, and histopathologic features of breast cancers detected at screening magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, screening mammography, and those detected between screening examinations (interval cancers) in women at high risk. Materials and Methods This retrospective institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant review of 7519 women at high risk for breast cancer who underwent screening with MR imaging and mammography between January 2005 and December 2010 was performed to determine the number of screening-detected and interval cancers diagnosed. The need for informed consent was waived. Medical records were reviewed for age, risk factors (family or personal history of breast cancer, BRCA mutation status, history of high-risk lesion or mantle radiation), tumor histopathologic results, and time between diagnosis of interval cancer and most recent screening examination. The χ(2) test and logistic regression methods were used to compare the features of screening MR imaging, screening mammography, and interval cancers. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to calculate P values. Results A total of 18 064 screening MR imaging examinations and 26 866 screening mammographic examinations were performed. Two hundred twenty-two cancers were diagnosed in 219 women, 167 (75%) at MR imaging, 43 (19%) at mammography, and 12 (5%) interval cancers. Median age at diagnosis was 52 years. No risk factors were associated with screening MR imaging, screening mammography, or interval cancer (P > .06). Cancers found at screening MR imaging were more likely to be invasive cancer (118 of 167 [71%]; P < .0001). Of the 43 cancers found at screening mammography, 38 (88%) manifested as calcifications and 28 (65%) were ductal carcinoma in situ. Interval cancers were associated with nodal involvement (P = .005) and the triple-negative subtype (P = .03). Conclusion In women at high risk for breast cancer who underwent screening with mammography and MR imaging, invasive cancers were more likely to be detected at MR imaging, whereas most cancers detected at screening mammography were ductal carcinoma in situ. Interval cancers were found infrequently and were more likely to be node positive and of the triple-negative subtype. (©) RSNA, 2016.

Lifetime Costs of Prophylactic Mastectomies and Reconstruction versus Surveillance

BACKGROUND

The past decade has seen an increasing prevalence of prophylactic mastectomy with decreasing ages of patients treated for breast cancer. Data are limited on the fiscal impacts of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy trends, and no study has compared bilateral prophylactic mastectomy with reconstruction to surveillance in high-risk patients.

METHODS

Lifetime third-party payer costs over 30 years were estimated with 2013 Medicare reimbursement rates. Costs were estimated for patients choosing contralateral or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy versus surveillance, with immediate reconstructions using a single-stage implant, tissue expander, or perforator-based free flap approach. Published cancer incidence rates predicted the percentage of surveillance patients that would require mastectomies. Sensitivity analyses were conducted that varied cost growth, discount rate, cancer incidence rate, and other variables. Lifetime costs and present values (3 percent discount rate) were estimated.

RESULTS

Lifetime prophylactic mastectomy costs were lower than surveillance costs, $1292 to $1993 lower for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and $15,668 to $21,342 lower for bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, depending on the reconstruction. Present value estimates were slightly higher for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy over contralateral surveillance but still cost saving for bilateral prophylactic mastectomy compared with bilateral surveillance. Present value estimates are also cost saving for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy when the modeled contralateral breast cancer incidence rate is increased to at least 0.6 percent per year.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings are consistent with contralateral and bilateral prophylactic mastectomy being cost saving in many scenarios, regardless of the reconstructive option chosen. They suggest that physicians and patients should continue to receive flexibility in deciding how best to proceed clinically in each case.

Early detection of cancer: past, present, and future

Screening in both healthy and high-risk populations offers the opportunity to detect cancer early and with an increased opportunity for treatment and curative intent. Currently, a defined role for screening exists in some cancer types, but each screening test has limitations, and improved screening methods are urgently needed. Unfortunately, many cancers still lack effective screening recommendations, or in some cases, the benefits from screening are marginal when weighed against the potential for harm. Here we review the current status of cancer screening: we examine the role of traditional tumor biomarkers, describe recommended imaging for early tumor surveillance, and explore the potential of promising novel cancer markers such as circulating tumor cells (CTC) and circulating tumor DNA. Consistent challenges for all of these screening tests include limited sensitivity and specificity. The risk for overdiagnosis remains a particular concern in screening, whereby lesions of no clinical consequence may be detected and thus create difficult management decisions for the clinician and patient. If treatment is pursued following overdiagnosis, patients may be exposed to morbidity from a treatment that may not provide any true benefit. The cost-effectiveness of screening tests also needs to be an ongoing focus. The improvement of genomic and surveillance technologies, which leads to more precise imaging and the ability to characterize blood-based tumor markers of greater specificity, offers opportunities for major progress in cancer screening.

The role of dynamic contrast-enhanced screening breast MRI in populations at increased risk for breast cancer

Breast MRI is more sensitive than mammography in detecting breast cancer. However, MRI as a screening tool is limited to high-risk patients due to cost, low specificity and insufficient evidence for its use in intermediate-risk populations. Nonetheless, in the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the use of breast-screening MRI in the community setting. In this review, we set to describe the current literature on the use of screening MRI in high- and intermediate-risk populations. We will also describe novel applications of breast MRI including abbreviated breast MRI protocols, background parenchymal enhancement and diffusion-weighted imaging.

Clinical management of women at high risk of breast cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the evidence that underpins breast cancer screening and prevention strategies for women at high risk of the disease, with a particular focus on evidence published in the last 18 months. The review is timely because the US National Comprehensive Cancer Network, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the American Society of Clinical Oncology have recently updated relevant guidelines that inform practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the recently published literature, there have been several important findings. A meta-analysis of randomized trials of selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), along with the first results from the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study II trial, further support the use of SERMs and aromatase inhibitors in the primary prevention of breast cancer. A large observational study has provided evidence that the SERM tamoxifen may be efficacious for breast cancer prevention in women who carry mutations in the breast cancer predisposition genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2. Several observational studies have suggested that contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy, following a diagnosis of breast cancer, may reduce mortality.

SUMMARY

Evidence regarding the optimal management of women at high risk of breast cancer continues to evolve and needs to be rapidly implemented into clinical practice.