Primum Non Nocere

Real-World Diagnostic Accuracy of the On-Site Cytopathology Advance Report (OSCAR) Procedure Performed in a Multidisciplinary One-Stop Breast Clinic

Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology has been widely used for the diagnosis of breast cancer lesions with the objective of differentiating benign from malignant masses. However, the occurrence of unsatisfactory samples and false-negative rates remains a matter of concern. Major improvements have been made thanks to the implementation of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) in multidisciplinary and integrated medical settings such as one-stop clinics (OSCs). In these settings, clinical and radiological examinations are combined with a morphological study performed by interventional pathologists. The aim of our study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the on-site cytopathology advance report (OSCAR) procedure on breast FNA cytologic samples in our breast OSC during the first three years (April 2004 till March 2007) of its implementation. To this goal, we retrospectively analyzed a series of 1820 breast masses (1740 patients) radiologically classified according to the American College of Radiology (ACR) BI-RADS lexicon (67.6% being either BI-RADS 4 or 5), sampled by FNA and immediately diagnosed by cytomorphology. The clinicoradiological, cytomorphological, and histological characteristics of all consecutive patients were retrieved from the hospital computerized medical records prospectively registered in the central information system. Histopathological analysis and ultrasound (US) follow-up (FU) were the reference diagnostic tests of the study design. In brief, we carried out either a histopathological verification or an 18-month US evaluation when a benign cytology was concordant with the components of the triple test. Overall, histology was available for 1138 masses, whereas 491 masses were analyzed at the 18-month US-FU. FNA specimens were morphologically nondiagnostic in 3.1%, false negatives were observed in 1.5%, and there was only one false positive (0.06%). The breast cancer prevalence was 62%. Diagnostic accuracy measures of the OSCAR procedure with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were the following: sensitivity (Se) = 97.4% (96.19-98.31); specificity (Sp) = 94.98% (92.94-96.56); positive predictive value (PPV) = 96.80% (95.48-97.81); negative predictive value (NPV) = 95.91% (94.02-97.33); positive likelihood ratio (LR+) = 19.39 (13.75-27.32); negative predictive ratio (LR-) = 0.03 (0.02-0.04), and; accuracy = 96.45% (95.42-97.31). The respective positive likelihood ratio (LR+) for each of the four categories of cytopathological diagnoses (with their 95% CI) which are malignant, suspicious, benign, and nondiagnostic were 540 (76-3827); 2.69 (1.8-3.96); 0.03 (0.02-0.04); and 0.37 (0.2-0.66), respectively. In conclusion, our study demonstrates that the OSCAR procedure is a highly reliable diagnostic approach and a perfect test to select patients requiring core-needle biopsy (CNB) when performed by interventional cytopathologists in a multidisciplinary and integrated OSC setting. Besides drastically limiting the rate of nondiagnostic specimens and diagnostic turn-around time, OSCAR is an efficient and powerful first-line diagnostic approach for patient-centered care.

A Cross-Sectional Observational Study to Compare the Role of Ultrasound with Mammography in Women Identified at High Risk for Breast Cancer in a Population in China

Background

Currently, there is no national breast cancer screening program in China. In countries that have screening programs, screening mammography is used. This study aimed to compare the imaging parameters and diagnostic findings between ultrasound and mammography in women at high risk who had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer in a population in China.

Material/Methods

A cross-sectional observational study included 1,687 women with a risk score of ≥30, according to the cancer risk assessment model, who underwent breast ultrasound and mammography. Women who had a Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) score of 4 or 5 were identified, and 155 women had breast cancer confirmed by breast biopsy and histology. The ultrasound and mammography findings were evaluated and compared.

Results

Breast ultrasound resulted in significantly fewer inconclusive results (BI-RADS score, 0), when compared with mammography (p=0.046). In cases with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer (BI-RADS score, 4), the diagnostic sensitivity of breast ultrasound and mammography were 0.989 and 0.859, respectively. In cases with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer (BI-RADS score, 5), the diagnostic sensitivity of breast ultrasound and mammography were 1.000 and 0.984, respectively. In cases with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of benign breast lesions (BI-RADS score, 2), there was no significant difference between breast ultrasound and mammography.

Conclusions

In a population of women in China, breast ultrasound was a more sensitive diagnostic imaging method for women with high risk BI-RADS 4 and 5 breast lesions.