Trends in frequency and outcome of high-risk breast lesions at core needle biopsy in women recalled at biennial screening mammography, a multiinstitutional study

Why Start Now? Retrospective Study Evaluating Baseline Screening Mammography in Patients Age 60 and Older

PURPOSE

Extensive data exist regarding the importance of baseline mammography and screening recommendations in the age range of 40-50 years old, however, less is known about women who start screening at age 60. The purpose of this retrospective study is to assess the characteristics and outcomes of women aged 60 years and older presenting for baseline mammographic screening.

METHODS

This is an IRB-approved single institution retrospective review of data from patients aged 60+ receiving baseline screening mammograms between 2010 and 2022 was obtained. Information regarding patient demographics, breast density, and BI-RADS assessment was acquired from Cerner EHR. Of patients with a BI-RADS 0 assessment, imaging, and chart review was performed. Family history, gynecologic history, prior breast biopsy or surgery, and hormone use was reviewed. For those with a category 4 or 5 assessment after diagnostic work-up, biopsy outcomes were reported. Cancer detection rate (CDR), recall rate (RR), positive predictive value 1 (PPV1), PPV2, and PPV3 were calculated.

RESULTS

Data was analyzed from 1409 women over age 60 who underwent breast cancer screening. The recall rate was 29.3% (413/1409). The CDR, PPV1, PPV2, and PPV3 were calculated as 15/1000, 5.2% (21/405), 29.2% (21/72), and 31.8% (21/66), respectively. After work-up, 224 diagnostic patients had a 1-year follow-up and none were diagnosed with breast cancer. One (1.4%, 1/71) of the BI-RADS 3 lesions was malignant at 2-year follow-up. Of the patients recalled from screening, 29.6% had a family history of breast cancer, and the majority of both recalled and nonrecalled patients had Category B breast density. There was no statistically significant difference in breast density or race of patients recalled vs not recalled. 93.2% of recalled cases were given BI-RADS descriptors, with mass and focal asymmetry being the most common lesions, and 22.1% of recalled cases included more than one lesion.

CONCLUSION

Initiating screening mammography for patients over 60 years old may result in higher recall rates, but also leads to a high CDR of potentially clinically relevant invasive cancers. After a diagnostic work-up, BI-RADS 3 assessments are within standard guidelines. This study provides guidance for radiologists reading baseline mammograms and clinicians making screening recommendations in patients over age 60.

Implementation of vacuum-assisted excision as a management option for benign and high-risk breast lesions

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have shown that vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative for surgical excision (SE) of benign breast lesions. However, the use of VAE in high-risk lesions is controversial and guidelines are ambiguous. This study describes the impact of the implementation of VAE in terms of management and outcomes compared to a cohort before implementation.

METHODS

A single centre retrospective study with two cohorts: 'before' and 'after' implementation of VAE was performed. All patients with a benign or high-risk lesion treated by VAE or SE between 2016 and 2019 were included. Excision, complication, and upgrade rates were compared between both cohorts. Cox regression was used for the evaluation of recurrences and re-excisions.

RESULTS

The overall excision rate of all benign and high-risk lesions was comparable in both cohorts (17% vs 16%, p = 0.700). After implementation, benign lesions were significantly more often managed by VAE (101/151, 67%, p < 0.001). Re-excision, recurrence, and complication rates were low and comparable between cohorts (4.3% vs 3.9%, p > 0.999; 3.0 vs 2.0%, p = 0.683; 3.4 vs 6.6%, p = 0.289, respectively).

CONCLUSION

SE could safely be replaced by VAE in 58% of patients treated for a benign or high-risk lesion. With this shift in management, the use of operating rooms and general anaesthesia can safely be omitted in this patient group. Further research on high-risk lesions is warranted since our data are exploratory.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

This study provides supportive data for the use of VAE as a management option for both benign (up to 5 cm) and high-risk lesions. Outcomes on re-excision, recurrence should be confirmed in prospective studies especially in high-risk lesions.

Are Columnar Cell Lesions the Earliest Non-Obligate Precursor in the Low-Grade Breast Neoplasia Pathway?

Columnar cell lesions (CCLs) of the breast comprise a spectrum of morphologic alterations of the terminal duct lobular unit involving variably dilated and enlarged acini lined by columnar epithelial cells. The World Health Organization currently classifies CCLs without atypia as columnar cell change (CCC) and columnar cell hyperplasia (CCH), whereas flat epithelial atypia (FEA) is a unifying term encompassing both CCC and CCH with cytologic atypia. CCLs have been increasingly recognized in stereotactic core needle biopsies (CNBs) performed for the assessment of calcifications. CCLs are believed to represent the earliest non-obligate precursor of low-grade invasive breast carcinomas as they share molecular alterations and often coexist with entities in the low-grade breast neoplasia pathway. Despite this association, however, the risk of progression of CCLs to invasive breast carcinoma appears low and may not exceed that of concurrent proliferative lesions. As the reported upgrade rates of pure CCL/FEA when identified as the most advanced high-risk lesion on CNB vary widely, the management of FEA diagnosed on CNB remains controversial. This review will include a historical overview of CCLs and will examine histologic diagnostic criteria, molecular alterations, prognosis and issues related to upgrade rates and clinical management.

Hospital costs and cosmetic outcome of benign and high-risk breast lesions managed by vacuum-assisted excision versus surgical excision

Objectives:

Although vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) is a safe and effective alternative to surgical excision (SE), the latter is most commonly used for the management of benign and high-risk breast lesions. To evaluate the healthcare benefit of VAE, hospital costs and cosmetic outcome after VAE were compared to SE. Additionally, the impact of VAE implementation on hospital costs was investigated.

Methods:

This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study with two cohorts: “VAE” and “SE”. All patients with a benign or high-risk lesion excised by VAE or SE from January 2016 up to December 2019 were included. Cosmetic outcome was measured with the BCTOS-cosmetic subscale, and hospital costs were presented as mean (SD) and median (IQR).

Results:

During the study period, 258 patients with 295 excised lesions were included. The initial procedure was VAE in 102 patients and SE in 156 patients. Hospital costs after (median € 2324) were significantly lower than before (median € 3,144) implementation of VAE (mean difference € 1,004, p < 0.001), most likely attributable to the lower costs for patients treated with VAE (mean difference € 1,979, p < 0.001). Mean cosmetic outcome was comparable between VAE (median 1.35) and SE (median 1.44, p = 0.802).

Conclusions:

Implementing VAE as an alternative treatment option for benign and high-risk breast lesions resulted in a large decrease in hospital costs but a cosmetic benefit of VAE could not be demonstrated in this retrospective study.

Advances in knowledge:

Costs associated with the complete patient pathway were included and not only VAE was compared to SE but also the before cohort was compared to the after cohort to demonstrate the benefit of VAE implementation in clinical practice. Additionally, cosmetic outcome was compared between VAE and SE using patient reported outcome measures.

Upgrade rate of percutaneously diagnosed pure flat epithelial atypia: systematic review and meta-analysis of 1,924 lesions

CONTEXT

Management remains controversial due to the risk of upgrade for malignancy from flat epithelial atypia (FEA). Data about the frequency and malignancy upgrade rates are scant. Namely, observational follow-up is advised by many studies in cases of pure FEA on core biopsy and in the absence of an additional surgical excision. For cases of pure FEA, the American College of Surgeons no longer recommends surgical excision but rather recommends observation with clinical and imaging follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to calculate the pooled upgrade of pure FEA following core needle biopsies.

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE and Embase databases were conducted in December 2020. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. A fixed- or random-effects model was utilized. Heterogeneity among studies was estimated by utilizing the I2 statistic and considered high if the I2 was greater than 50%. The random-effects model with the DerSimonian and Laird method was utilized to calculate the pooled upgrade rate and its 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

A total of 1924 pure FEA were analyzed among 59 included studies. The overall pooled upgrade rate to malignancy was 8.8%. The pooled upgrade rate for mammography only was 8.9%. The pooled upgrade rate for ultrasound was 14%. The pooled upgrade rate for mammography and ultrasound combined was 8.8%. The pooled upgrade rate for MRI-only cases was 27.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the guidelines for the management of pure FEA are variable, our data support that pure FEA diagnosed at core needle biopsy should undergo surgical excision since the upgrade rate >2%.

Risk management recommendations and patient acceptance vary with high-risk breast lesions

INTRODUCTION

Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), atypical ductal and lobular hyperplasia (AH) increase breast cancer risk. We examined risk management recommendations (RMR) and acceptance in AH/LCIS.

METHODS

All patients with AH/LCIS on core needle biopsy from 2013 to 2016 at our institution were identified; cancer patients were excluded. Univariate and multivariate analysis examined factors associated with management.

RESULTS

98 % of patients were evaluated by breast surgeons and 53 % underwent risk model calculation (RC). 77 % had new RMR. RMR of MRI screening (MRI), genetic counselling (GC) and medical oncology (MO) referral were 41 %, 18 %, 77 %, respectively. MRI screening was more likely recommended in those with strong family history (p = 0.01), and high RC (p < 0.001). Uptake of at least one RMR did not occur in 84 % of patients. Use of RC correlated with MO acceptance (p = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnosis of atypia has the potential to change risk management for most, however only 16 % of patients accepted all RMR.

Flat epithelial atypia: What the radiologist needs to know in 2021

The World Health Organization defines flat epithelial atypia (FEA), as a "presumably neoplastic intraductal alteration characterized by the replacement of native epithelial cells by a single layer or three to five layers of mildly atypical cells.". In this article, we will review FEA and compare its characteristics and differences with other atypical high-risk breast lesions. In addition, the imaging appearance of FEA will be described. Finally, we will discuss current outcomes and provide an update on its management based on the last recommendations.

Upgrade Rate of Pure Flat Epithelial Atypia Diagnosed at Core Needle Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to calculate the pooled upgrade rate of pure flat epithelial atypia (FEA) diagnosed at core needle biopsy (CNB).

Materials and Methods

A PubMed and Embase database search was performed in December 2019. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Study quality and publication bias were assessed. The upgrade rate of pure FEA to cancer, invasive carcinoma, and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), as well as the co-occurrence rate of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), with 95% CIs were calculated. A random effect model was used to integrate the proportions and their corresponding 95% CI. Study heterogeneity was calculated using τ2 and I 2 .

Results

A total of 2482 cases of pure FEA across 42 studies (mean age range, 46-59 years) met inclusion criteria to be analyzed. Significant study heterogeneity was identified (τ2 = 0.001, I 2 = 67%). The pooled upgrade rates reported for pure FEA were 5% (95% CI: 3%, 6%) for breast cancer, 1% (95% CI: 0%, 2%) for invasive carcinoma, and 2% (95% CI: 1%, 3%) for DCIS. When more than 90% of calcifications were removed at CNB, the pooled upgrade rate was 0% (95% CI: 0%, 2%). The pooled co-occurrence rate of ADH at surgical excision was 17% (95% CI: 12%, 21%). Study quality was medium to high with a risk of publication bias (P < .01).

Conclusion

Pure FEA diagnosed at CNB should be surgically excised due to the pooled upgrade rate of 5% for breast cancer. If more than 90% of the targeted calcifications are removed by CNB for pure FEA, close imaging follow-up is recommended.Keywords: Biopsy/Needle Aspiration, Breast, MammographySupplemental material is available for this article.© RSNA, 2021.

Patient reported cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision of benign breast lesions: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Better cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision (VAE) compared to surgical excision of benign breast lesions is suggested in previous studies but has never been evaluated with validated outcome measures. In this study, patient reported cosmetic outcome after VAE was evaluated.

METHODS

Patients who underwent VAE between July 2017 and December 2018 were invited to complete the cosmetic subscale of the Dutch Breast Cancer Treatment Outcome Scale, comparing the treated with the untreated breast. Response mode ranged from 1 (no difference) to 4 (large difference) and cosmetic outcome was calculated as the unweighted mean. Clinical outcomes included: tumor size, number of cores, complications, residual lesions and recurrences.

RESULTS

Response rate was 73.4% (47 of 64 patients). Median tumor size was 15 mm (range 5-51 mm) and median number of cores 6.5 (range 1-85), complete excision was confirmed in all but two patients. Mean cosmetic outcome was good (mean score ≤1.75) in 74% of patients and no patients reported a poor cosmetic outcome (mean score >3.25). A hematoma occurred in five patients (one needed aspiration) and a skin rash in one patient, no patients developed an infection or seroma.

CONCLUSION

In this study VAE is safe and effective for tumors up to 5 cm and patient reported cosmetic outcome was good. Patients with benign lesions could benefit from VAE as an alternative for surgical excision.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

A formal quantitative measurement of cosmetic outcome after vacuum assisted excision for benign breast lesions was still lacking. This study shows that this cosmetic outcome is overall good in benign lesions up to 5 cm.