Mammography: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information

Lockdown of Breast Cancer Screening for COVID-19: Possible Scenario

BACKGROUND/AIM

Coronavirus disease is spreading worldwide. Due to fast transmission and high fatality rate drastic emergency restrictions were issued. During the lockdown, only urgent medical services are guaranteed. All non-urgent services, as breast cancer (BC) screening, are temporarily suspended. The potential of breast cancer screening programs in increasing the survival rate and decreasing the mortality rate has been widely confirmed. Suspension could lead to worse outcomes for breast cancer patients. Our study aimed to analyse the data and provide estimates regarding the temporary BC screening suspension.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data regarding breast cancer and respective screening programs were achieved through literature research and analysis.

RESULTS

Considering three different scenarios with respect to the lockdown's impact on breast cancer screening, we estimate that approximately 10,000 patients could have a missed diagnosis during these 3 months. Considering a 6-month period, as suggested by the Imperial college model, the number of patients who will not receive a diagnosis will rise to 16,000.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer screening should be resumed as soon as possible in order to avoid further breast cancer missed diagnosis and reduce the impact of delayed diagnosis.

Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging

We summarise here the information to be provided to women and referring physicians about percutaneous breast biopsy and lesion localisation under imaging guidance. After explaining why a preoperative diagnosis with a percutaneous biopsy is preferred to surgical biopsy, we illustrate the criteria used by radiologists for choosing the most appropriate combination of device type for sampling and imaging technique for guidance. Then, we describe the commonly used devices, from fine-needle sampling to tissue biopsy with larger needles, namely core needle biopsy and vacuum-assisted biopsy, and how mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging work for targeting the lesion for sampling or localisation. The differences among the techniques available for localisation (carbon marking, metallic wire, radiotracer injection, radioactive seed, and magnetic seed localisation) are illustrated. Type and rate of possible complications are described and the issue of concomitant antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy is also addressed. The importance of pathological-radiological correlation is highlighted: when evaluating the results of any needle sampling, the radiologist must check the concordance between the cytology/pathology report of the sample and the radiological appearance of the biopsied lesion. We recommend that special attention is paid to a proper and tactful approach when communicating to the woman the need for tissue sampling as well as the possibility of cancer diagnosis, repeat tissue sampling, and or even surgery when tissue sampling shows a lesion with uncertain malignant potential (also referred to as "high-risk" or B3 lesions). Finally, seven frequently asked questions are answered.

Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging

This article summarises the information that should be provided to women and referring physicians about breast ultrasound (US). After explaining the physical principles, technical procedure and safety of US, information is given about its ability to make a correct diagnosis, depending on the setting in which it is applied. The following definite indications for breast US in female subjects are proposed: palpable lump; axillary adenopathy; first diagnostic approach for clinical abnormalities under 40 and in pregnant or lactating women; suspicious abnormalities at mammography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); suspicious nipple discharge; recent nipple inversion; skin retraction; breast inflammation; abnormalities in the area of the surgical scar after breast conserving surgery or mastectomy; abnormalities in the presence of breast implants; screening high-risk women, especially when MRI is not performed; loco-regional staging of a known breast cancer, when MRI is not performed; guidance for percutaneous interventions (needle biopsy, pre-surgical localisation, fluid collection drainage); monitoring patients with breast cancer receiving neo-adjuvant therapy, when MRI is not performed. Possible indications such as supplemental screening after mammography for women aged 40-74 with dense breasts are also listed. Moreover, inappropriate indications include screening for breast cancer as a stand-alone alternative to mammography. The structure and organisation of the breast US report and of classification systems such as the BI-RADS and consequent management recommendations are illustrated. Information about additional or new US technologies (colour-Doppler, elastography, and automated whole breast US) is also provided. Finally, five frequently asked questions are answered.

TEACHING POINTS

• US is an established tool for suspected cancers at all ages and also the method of choice under 40. • For US-visible suspicious lesions, US-guided biopsy is preferred, even for palpable findings. • High-risk women can be screened with US, especially when MRI cannot be performed. • Supplemental US increases cancer detection but also false positives, biopsy rate and follow-up exams. • Breast US is inappropriate as a stand-alone screening method.

Organizational and welfare mode of breast centers network: a survey of Sicilian radiologists

The European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists has created quality indicators for breast units to establish the minimum standards of care for patients. In Italy, each region differs, indeed, in terms of health care and services warranted to patients suffering from breast cancer. Since Sicilian Regional Administration today is still disregarding implementation of the provisions contained in the proposal of the Ministry of Health entitled "Guidelines on Organizational and Health Care Methods of Breast Centers Network" in November 2015 the Sicilian Regional Group of the Italian Society of Radiology (SIRM) decided to carry out a survey to see the position of the Sicilian Healthcare System and define the gap to bridge over. Sicilian breast imaging radiologists were asked to fill in a questionnaire concerning the type of job relationship (public or private sector), qualification (Manager, Department Manager, Freelancer) and years of experience on breast imaging. With regard to technological requirements, were answered the questions about the number, type, age and completeness of accessories of the equipment supplied in the Sicilian healthcare facilities. The data showed that over 64% of breast imagers in Sicilian centers work in breast units, whereas only 18% are involved in screening programs. A majority of radiologists (81%) working in the breast health care system is very experienced (more than 10 years of experience in the field). The result provided concerning the medical and technical staff demonstrates an uneven situation, but overall an inadequate value compared with the required guidelines especially in interventional procedures. The aim of this paper is to illustrate the method used and the results obtained. These data have to be shared with policy makers to enhance quality improvement in Sicilian Breast Center Network.

Recommendations for breast imaging follow-up of women with a previous history of breast cancer: position paper from the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa) and the Italian College of Breast Radiologists (ICBR) by SIRM

Women who were previously treated for breast cancer (BC) are an important particular subgroup of women at intermediate BC risk. Their breast follow-up should be planned taking in consideration a 1.0-1.5 % annual rate of loco-regional recurrences and new ipsilateral or contralateral BCs during 15-20 years, and be based on a regional/district invitation system. This activity should be carried out by a Department of Radiology integrating screening and diagnostics in the context of a Breast Unit. We recommend the adoption of protocols dedicated to women previously treated for BC, with a clear definition of responsibilities, methods for invitation, site(s) of visits, methods for clinical and radiological evaluation, follow-up duration, role and function of family doctors and specialists. These women will be invited to get a mammogram in dedicated sessions starting from the year after the end of treatment. The planned follow-up duration will be at least 10 years and will be defined on the basis of patient's age and preferences, taking into consideration organizational matters. Special agreements can be defined in the case of women who have their follow-up planned at other qualified centers. Dedicated screening sessions should include: evaluation of familial/personal history (if previously not done) for identifying high-risk conditions which could indicate a different screening strategy; immediate evaluation of mammograms by one or, when possible, two breast radiologists with possible addition of supplemental mammographic views, digital breast tomosynthesis, clinical breast examination, breast ultrasound; and prompt planning of possible further workup. Results of these screening sessions should be set apart from those of general female population screening and presented in dedicated reports. The following research issues are suggested: further risk stratification and effectiveness of follow-up protocols differentiated also for BC pathologic subtype and molecular classification, and evaluation of different models of survivorship care, also in terms of cost-effectiveness.

Mammography: an update of the EUSOBI recommendations on information for women

Abstract

This article summarises the information to be offered to women about mammography. After a delineation of the aim of early diagnosis of breast cancer, the difference between screening mammography and diagnostic mammography is explained. The need to bring images and reports from the previous mammogram (and from other recent breast imaging examinations) is highlighted. Mammography technique and procedure are described with particular attention to discomfort and pain experienced by a small number of women who undergo the test. Information is given on the recall during a screening programme and on the request for further work-up after a diagnostic mammography. The logic of the mammography report and of classification systems such as R1-R5 and BI-RADS is illustrated, and brief but clear information is given about the diagnostic performance of the test, with particular reference to interval cancers, i.e., those cancers that are missed at screening mammography. Moreover, the breast cancer risk due to radiation exposure from mammography is compared to the reduction in mortality obtained with the test, and the concept of overdiagnosis is presented with a reliable estimation of its extent. Information about new mammographic technologies (tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced spectral mammography) is also given. Finally, frequently asked questions are answered.

Key Points

• Direct digital mammography should be preferred to film-screen or phosphor plates.

• Screening (in asymptomatic women) should be distinguished from diagnosis (in symptomatic women).

• A breast symptom has to be considered even after a negative mammogram.

• Digital breast tomosynthesis increases cancer detection and decreases the recall rate.

• Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography can help in cancer detection and lesion characterisation.

Position paper on screening for breast cancer by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) and 30 national breast radiology bodies from Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Israel, Lithuania, Moldova, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey

Abstract

EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support mammography for population-based screening, demonstrated to reduce breast cancer (BC) mortality and treatment impact. According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the reduction in mortality is 40 % for women aged 50–69 years taking up the invitation while the probability of false-positive needle biopsy is <1 % per round and overdiagnosis is only 1–10 % for a 20-year screening. Mortality reduction was also observed for the age groups 40–49 years and 70–74 years, although with “limited evidence”. Thus, we firstly recommend biennial screening mammography for average-risk women aged 50–69 years; extension up to 73 or 75 years, biennially, is a second priority, from 40–45 to 49 years, annually, a third priority. Screening with thermography or other optical tools as alternatives to mammography is discouraged. Preference should be given to population screening programmes on a territorial basis, with double reading. Adoption of digital mammography (not film-screen or phosphor-plate computer radiography) is a priority, which also improves sensitivity in dense breasts. Radiologists qualified as screening readers should be involved in programmes. Digital breast tomosynthesis is also set to become “routine mammography” in the screening setting in the next future. Dedicated pathways for high-risk women offering breast MRI according to national or international guidelines and recommendations are encouraged.

Key points

• EUSOBI and 30 national breast radiology bodies support screening mammography.

• A first priority is double-reading biennial mammography for women aged 50–69 years.

• Extension to 73–75 and from 40–45 to 49 years is also encouraged.

• Digital mammography (not film-screen or computer radiography) should be used.

• DBT is set to become “routine mammography” in the screening setting in the next future.

Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information

This paper summarizes information about breast MRI to be provided to women and referring physicians. After listing contraindications, procedure details are described, stressing the need for correct scheduling and not moving during the examination. The structured report including BI-RADS® categories and further actions after a breast MRI examination are discussed. Breast MRI is a very sensitive modality, significantly improving screening in high-risk women. It also has a role in clinical diagnosis, problem solving, and staging, impacting on patient management. However, it is not a perfect test, and occasionally breast cancers can be missed. Therefore, clinical and other imaging findings (from mammography/ultrasound) should also be considered. Conversely, MRI may detect lesions not visible on other imaging modalities turning out to be benign (false positives). These risks should be discussed with women before a breast MRI is requested/performed. Because breast MRI drawbacks depend upon the indication for the examination, basic information for the most important breast MRI indications is presented. Seventeen notes and five frequently asked questions formulated for use as direct communication to women are provided. The text was reviewed by Europa Donna-The European Breast Cancer Coalition to ensure that it can be easily understood by women undergoing MRI.

KEY POINTS

• Information on breast MRI concerns advantages/disadvantages and preparation to the examination • Claustrophobia, implantable devices, allergic predisposition, and renal function should be checked • Before menopause, scheduling on day 7-14 of the cycle is preferred • During the examination, it is highly important that the patient keeps still • Availability of prior examinations improves accuracy of breast MRI interpretation.

Socioecological determinants of mammography screening in Mexican rural areas

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to determine which socioecological factors encourage rural women to participate in mammographies rather than avoiding taking the test.

Design/methodology/approach

– The study mainly uses data from the 2007 Rural Households Evaluation Survey (ENCEL-2007). These crossover data are analyzed using the framework proposed in the Spatial-Interaction Model of Mammography Use (SIMMU), through a three-level logistic regression model to examine the likelihood that a woman will choose to participate in a mammography.

Findings

– At the woman-household level, the completion of the Pap smear and the asset index is the strongest determinant of mammography participation. Obtaining preventive medicine services or being enrolled in the Popular Insurance System prevent women from undergoing screening. At the interpersonal level, the probability of screening use decreases with lower social coverage. At the intermediate level, availability of health centers is negatively related to the use of screening.

Research limitations/implications

– The study fails to take into account the fact that women’s propensity to have a mammography may vary over time relatively to life changes. Moreover, findings were restricted to women ages from 40 to 49 and limited due to the lack of published data or data quality issues.

Practical implications

– The results of this research can give health planners, policymakers and social marketers a platform for how to approach social change and promote the cancer screening health behavior through the marketing mix (price, place, promotion and product) in the design of their programs.

Originality/value

– In addition to be informative and persuasive with people to change their behavior, this paper also seeks to provide a direction for using commercial marketing tools through social marketing to “sell” the health behavior. Due to target population variation, this paper addresses the health behavior change strategy by audience segmentation, regarded as essential to successful health communication campaigns.