1
|
Vanni G, Pellicciaro M, Materazzo M, Bruno V, Oldani C, Pistolese CA, Buonomo C, Caspi J, Gualtieri P, Chiaravalloti A, Palombi L, Piccione E, Buonomo OC. Lockdown of Breast Cancer Screening for COVID-19: Possible Scenario. In Vivo 2020; 34:3047-3053. [PMID: 32871851 DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2020] [Revised: 06/16/2020] [Accepted: 06/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gianluca Vanni
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Pellicciaro
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Marco Materazzo
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Valentina Bruno
- Section of Gynecology, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Chiara Oldani
- Department of Economics and Engineering, University of Viterbo 'La Tuscia', Viterbo, Italy
| | - Chiara Adriana Pistolese
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Molecular Imaging and Radiotherapy Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Chiara Buonomo
- Department of Emergency and Admission, Critical Care Medicine, Pain Medicine and Anesthetic Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Jonathan Caspi
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Paola Gualtieri
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Agostino Chiaravalloti
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy.,IRCCS Neuromed, UOC Medicina Nucleare, Pozzilli, Italy
| | - Leonardo Palombi
- Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Emilio Piccione
- Section of Gynecology, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| | - Oreste Claudio Buonomo
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bick U, Trimboli RM, Athanasiou A, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PAT, Bernathova M, Borbély K, Brkljacic B, Carbonaro LA, Clauser P, Cassano E, Colin C, Esen G, Evans A, Fallenberg EM, Fuchsjaeger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Herranz M, Kinkel K, Kilburn-Toppin F, Kuhl CK, Lesaru M, Lobbes MBI, Mann RM, Martincich L, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Schiaffino S, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Tardivon A, Ongeval CV, Wallis MG, Zackrisson S, Forrai G, Herrero JC, Sardanelli F. Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging 2020; 11:12. [PMID: 32025985 PMCID: PMC7002629 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-019-0803-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 85] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2019] [Accepted: 10/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- PhD Course in Integrative Biomedical Research, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli, 31, 20133, Milan, Italy
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94800, Villejuif, France
| | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Maria Bernathova
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Boris Brkljacic
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Dubrava, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Luca A Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Femme Mère Enfant, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69 677, Bron Cedex, France
| | - Gul Esen
- School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Tom McDonald Avenue, Dundee, UK
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Diagnostic and Interventional Breast Imaging, Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Michael H Fuchsjaeger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Michel Herranz
- CyclotronUnit, GALARIA-SERGAS, Nuclear Medicine Department and Molecular ImagingGroup, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Karen Kinkel
- Institut de Radiologie, Clinique des Grangettes, Chemin des Grangettes 7, 1224 Chêne-Bougeries, Genève, Switzerland
| | - Fleur Kilburn-Toppin
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Fundeni Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Marc B I Lobbes
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, PO Box 5500, 6130 MB, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Laura Martincich
- Unit of Radiodiagnostics ASL AT, Via Conte Verde 125, 14100, Asti, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, Scientific Institute (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina, 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria.,Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara
- Department of Radiology, Sorbonne Université, APHP, Hôpital Tenon, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France
| | - Anne Tardivon
- Department of Radiology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Chantal Van Ongeval
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Matthew G Wallis
- Cambridge Breast Unit and NIHR Biomedical Research Unit, Box 97, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Evans A, Trimboli RM, Athanasiou A, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA, Bick U, Camps Herrero J, Clauser P, Colin C, Cornford E, Fallenberg EM, Fuchsjaeger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Kinkel K, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Kuhl CK, Mann RM, Martincich L, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Zackrisson S, Forrai G, Sardanelli F. Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging 2018; 9:449-461. [PMID: 30094592 PMCID: PMC6108964 DOI: 10.1007/s13244-018-0636-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 77] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2018] [Revised: 04/28/2018] [Accepted: 05/14/2018] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Tom McDonald Avenue, Dundee, UK
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- PhD Course in Integrative Biomedical Research, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli, 31, 20133, Milan, Italy
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94800, Villejuif, France
| | - Pascal A Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Julia Camps Herrero
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of La Ribera, Carretera de Corbera, Km 1, 46600, Alzira, Valencia, Spain
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Femme Mère Enfant, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69 677, Bron Cedex, France
| | - Eleanor Cornford
- Thirlestaine Breast Centre, Cheltenham General Hospital, Thirlestaine Road, Cheltenham, GL53 7AP, UK
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael H Fuchsjaeger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Karen Kinkel
- Institut de Radiologie, Clinique des Grangettes, Chemin des Grangettes 7, 1224, Chêne-Bougeries, Genève, Switzerland
| | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Laura Martincich
- Unità Operativa Radiodiagnostica, Candiolo Cancer Institute - FPO, IRCCS, Str. Prov. 142, km 3.95, 10060, Candiolo, Turin, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, Scientific Institute (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina, 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pinker K. Advanced Imaging for Precision Medicine in Breast Cancer: From Morphology to Function. Breast Care (Basel) 2017; 12:208-210. [PMID: 29070982 DOI: 10.1159/000480397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Katja Pinker
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.,Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Marino MA, Pennisi O, Donia A, Sofia C, Guerra C, Privitera C, Romeo P. Organizational and welfare mode of breast centers network: a survey of Sicilian radiologists. Radiol Med 2017; 122:639-650. [PMID: 28429207 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-017-0763-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2017] [Accepted: 03/30/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Adele Marino
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Orazio Pennisi
- Breast Cancer Screening Center, ASP Catania, Catania, Italy
| | - Annalisa Donia
- Breast Cancer Screening Center, ASP Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Carmelo Sofia
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - Claudio Guerra
- ASL Toscana Centro, Ospedale "SS Cosma e Damiano" Pescia, Pescia, Italy
| | - Carmelo Privitera
- UOC Radiodiagnostica, AOU Policlinico Vittorio Emanuele-Catania, Catania, Italy
| | - Placido Romeo
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, S. Vincenzo Hospital, ASP Messina, C.da Sirina, 98039, Taormina, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
|
7
|
Bucchi L, Belli P, Benelli E, Bernardi D, Brancato B, Calabrese M, Carbonaro LA, Caumo F, Cavallo-Marincola B, Clauser P, Fedato C, Frigerio A, Galli V, Giordano L, Golinelli P, Mariscotti G, Martincich L, Montemezzi S, Morrone D, Naldoni C, Paduos A, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Querci F, Rizzo A, Saguatti G, Tagliafico A, Trimboli RM, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. 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. LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA 2016; 121:891-896. [PMID: 27601142 PMCID: PMC5102938 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-016-0676-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2016] [Accepted: 08/16/2016] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauro Bucchi
- Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (IRST) IRCCS, via Piero Maroncelli, 40, 47014, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
| | - Paolo Belli
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Agostino Gemelli, 8, 0168, Rome, Italy
| | - Eva Benelli
- Zadig Scientific Communication Agency, via Arezzo 21, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Daniela Bernardi
- Dipartimento di Radiologia, U.O. Senologia Clinica e Screening Mammografico, APSS, Centro per i Servizi Sanitari, Pal. C, viale Verona, 38123, Trento, Italy
| | - Beniamino Brancato
- Struttura Complessa di Senologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica (ISPO), Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- UOC Senologia Diagnostica, IRCCS AOU San Martino-IST, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, Italy
| | - Luca A Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesca Caumo
- UOSD Breast Unit ULSS20, Piazza Lambranzi 1, 37142, Verona, Italy
| | - Beatrice Cavallo-Marincola
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Oncologiche ed Anatomo-patologiche, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza Università di Roma, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna/General Hospital Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Verona, Austria
- Institute of Radiology, University of Udine, P.le S. M. della Misericordia 15, 33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Chiara Fedato
- Regional Screening Coordinating Centre, Veneto Region, Venice, Italy
| | - Alfonso Frigerio
- Regional Reference Centre for Breast Cancer Screening, Turin, Italy
| | - Vania Galli
- Mammography Screening Centre, Local Health Authority, Modena, Italy
| | - Livia Giordano
- Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Turin, Italy
| | - Paola Golinelli
- Medical Physics Service, Local Health Authority, Modena, Italy
| | - Giovanna Mariscotti
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radiologia 1U, Università di Torino, A. O. U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy
| | - Laura Martincich
- U.O. Radiodiagnostica, Candiolo Cancer Institute-FPO, IRCCS, Str. Prov. 142, km 3.95, I, 10060, Candiolo, Turin, Italy
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- DAI Patologia e Diagnostica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, P.le A. Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, Italy
| | - Doralba Morrone
- Struttura Complessa di Senologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica (ISPO), Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Carlo Naldoni
- Department of Health, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy
| | - Adriana Paduos
- Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Turin, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- U.O. Radiologia Senologica, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Oncologiche ed Anatomo-patologiche, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza Università di Roma, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Fiammetta Querci
- Department of Prevention, Screening Centre, Local Health Authority, Sassari, Italy
| | - Antonio Rizzo
- Pathology Department, Local Health Authority, Asolo, Italy
| | | | - Alberto Tagliafico
- Department of Experimental Medicine, DIMES, Institute of Anatomy, University of Genova, Via de Toni 14, 16132, Genoa, Italy
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- Unit of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, University of Udine, P.le S. M. della Misericordia 15, 33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sardanelli F, Fallenberg EM, Clauser P, Trimboli RM, Camps-Herrero J, Helbich TH, Forrai G. Mammography: an update of the EUSOBI recommendations on information for women. Insights Imaging 2016; 8:11-18. [PMID: 27854006 PMCID: PMC5265195 DOI: 10.1007/s13244-016-0531-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 61] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/27/2016] [Accepted: 10/24/2016] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
- Department of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin, Germany
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- Integrative Biomedical Research PhD Program, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
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. Eur Radiol 2016; 27:2737-2743. [PMID: 27807699 PMCID: PMC5486792 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4612-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 107] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2016] [Revised: 08/29/2016] [Accepted: 09/15/2016] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
10
|
Mariscotti G, Belli P, Bernardi D, Brancato B, Calabrese M, Carbonaro LA, Cavallo-Marincola B, Caumo F, Clauser P, Martinchich L, Montemezzi S, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Tagliafico A, Trimboli RM, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. Mammography and MRI for screening women who underwent chest radiation therapy (lymphoma survivors): recommendations for surveillance from the Italian College of Breast Radiologists by SIRM. Radiol Med 2016; 121:834-837. [DOI: 10.1007/s11547-016-0667-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2016] [Accepted: 06/22/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
11
|
Branderhorst W, de Groot JE, Neeter LMFH, van Lier MGJTB, Neeleman C, den Heeten GJ, Grimbergen CA. Force balancing in mammographic compression. Med Phys 2016; 43:518. [DOI: 10.1118/1.4939129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023] Open
|
12
|
Mann RM, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA, Bick U, Colin C, Cornford E, Evans A, Fallenberg E, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Camps-Herrero J, Kuhl CK, Martincich L, Pediconi F, Panizza P, Pina LJ, Pijnappel RM, Pinker-Domenig K, Skaane P, Sardanelli F. Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information. Eur Radiol 2015; 25:3669-78. [PMID: 26002130 PMCID: PMC4636525 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3807-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 283] [Impact Index Per Article: 31.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2015] [Revised: 02/28/2015] [Accepted: 04/15/2015] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Pascal A Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Lyon Sud, Pierre Bénite Cedex, France
| | - Eleanor Cornford
- Nottingham Breast Institute, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK
| | - Eva Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Gabor Forrai
- MHEK Teaching Hospital University Semmelweis, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Aachen, Germany
| | | | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Department of Radiology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Luis J Pina
- Department of Radiology, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker-Domenig
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Per Skaane
- Department of Radiology, Oslo University Hospital Ullevaal, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Sanchez-Lezama AP, Cavazos-Arroyo J, Albavera-Hernández C, Salinas-Rodríguez A, Lagunes-Pérez M, Perez-Armendariz B. Socioecological determinants of mammography screening in Mexican rural areas. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL AND HEALTHCARE MARKETING 2015. [DOI: 10.1108/ijphm-12-2013-0069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|