1
|
Carroll MC, Yen RW, Leech M, Barth RJ. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Role of Preoperative MRI in In-breast Tumor Recurrence After Breast-Conserving Surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:3926-3938. [PMID: 38520578 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14746-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2023] [Accepted: 11/25/2023] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND It is unknown whether the identification of additional tumors in the breast using preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (pMRI) results in a lower risk of in-breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant studies were performed. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS From 768 citations, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. The 20 studies consisted of 14 retrospective reviews, 3 matched cohorts, and 3 randomized controlled trials. Whereas 2 studies reported a statistically significant lower rate of IBTR with pMRI, 18 studies showed no difference, and no studies reported a higher rate. Of the 18 studies showing no significant difference, 12 demonstrated a trend toward a lower IBTR rate in the pMRI group. The criteria for meta-analysis were met by 16 studies. A meta-analysis of 11 studies that reported hazard ratios (HR) for IBTR showed a trend toward a lower rate of IBTR for patients who received preoperative MRI (hazard ratio (HR), 0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-1.05). A meta-analysis of five studies that reported event rates and had similar follow-up duration for both groups demonstrated a lower relative risk (RR) of IBTR (RR, 0.45; 95% CI 0.25-0.81). CONCLUSIONS Although some evidence supports the hypothesis that identification of additional tumors in the breast using pMRI results in lower rates of IBTR after BCS, the main meta-analysis in this study did not confirm this hypothesis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew C Carroll
- Department of Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.
| | - Renata W Yen
- The Dartmouth Institute, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA
| | - Mary Leech
- Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, NH, USA
| | - Richard J Barth
- Department of Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Urut DU, Karabulut D, Hereklioglu S, Özdemir G, Cicin BA, Hacıoglu B, Süt N, Tunçbilek N. Diffusion tensor imaging: survival analysis prediction in breast cancer patients. RADIOLOGIE (HEIDELBERG, GERMANY) 2024:10.1007/s00117-023-01254-0. [PMID: 38277036 DOI: 10.1007/s00117-023-01254-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2023] [Accepted: 11/14/2023] [Indexed: 01/27/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE We aimed to explore the performance of diffusion-tensor imaging (DTI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameters in evaluating disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with invasive breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 49 women with invasive breast cancer who were diagnosed between 2017 and 2022 were included. All patients underwent breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with DTI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) features, with examiners blinded to the clinical data. Volume anisotropy (VA), fractional anisotropy (FA), and ADC values were measured to assess intratumoral measured heterogeneity. Correlations and differences in diffusion metrics according to OS and DFS status of the cases were analyzed. The discriminative ability of the quantitative findings was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses and validated in the independent cohort. RESULTS We evaluated patients with metastases (n = 13, 36.5%) and those without metastases (n = 36, 73.5%). Differences in the ADC, FA, and VA values were observed. The results of Cox regression survival analysis for all the patients included in the survival analysis revealed that DTI metrics contributed to the prediction of overall survival (OS) in the emerging models (p < 0.05). Both FA and VA were associated with OS (p = 0.037 and p = 0.038, respectively). However, ADC was not associated with OS (p = 0.177) or DFS (p = 0.252). CONCLUSION To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the prognostic value of DTI-MRI in breast cancer with statistical survival analysis techniques. We believe that DTI measurements can be used as a biomarker for OS analysis in breast cancer given the available data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Devrim Ulaş Urut
- BHT Clinic İstanbul Tema Hospital Dep of Radiology, Istanbul Aydin University, Atakent mah. 4.cad. no: 36, 34307, Küçükçekmece/İstanbul, Turkey.
- Medical School Deparment of Radiology, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
| | - Derya Karabulut
- Medical School Department of Radiology, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey
| | - Savaş Hereklioglu
- Department of Radiology, Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Erzurum, Turkey
| | - Gulşah Özdemir
- Medical School Department of Radiology, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey
| | - Berkin Anıl Cicin
- Medical School Department of Medical Oncology, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey
| | - Bekir Hacıoglu
- Medical School Department of Medical Oncology, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey
| | - Necet Süt
- Medical School Dep of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey
| | - Nermin Tunçbilek
- Medical School Department of Radiology, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Cozzi A, Di Leo G, Houssami N, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Álvarez Benito M, Balleyguier C, Bazzocchi M, Bult P, Calabrese M, Camps Herrero J, Cartia F, Cassano E, Clauser P, de Lima Docema MF, Depretto C, Dominelli V, Forrai G, Girometti R, Harms SE, Hilborne S, Ienzi R, Lobbes MBI, Losio C, Mann RM, Montemezzi S, Obdeijn IM, Ozcan UA, Pediconi F, Pinker K, Preibsch H, Raya Povedano JL, Rossi Saccarelli C, Sacchetto D, Scaperrotta GP, Schlooz M, Szabó BK, Taylor DB, Ulus ÖS, Van Goethem M, Veltman J, Weigel S, Wenkel E, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. Screening and diagnostic breast MRI: how do they impact surgical treatment? Insights from the MIPA study. Eur Radiol 2023; 33:6213-6225. [PMID: 37138190 PMCID: PMC10415233 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09600-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2022] [Revised: 01/19/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To report mastectomy and reoperation rates in women who had breast MRI for screening (S-MRI subgroup) or diagnostic (D-MRI subgroup) purposes, using multivariable analysis for investigating the role of MRI referral/nonreferral and other covariates in driving surgical outcomes. METHODS The MIPA observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed breast cancer destined to have surgery as the primary treatment, in 27 centres worldwide. Mastectomy and reoperation rates were compared using non-parametric tests and multivariable analysis. RESULTS A total of 5828 patients entered analysis, 2763 (47.4%) did not undergo MRI (noMRI subgroup) and 3065 underwent MRI (52.6%); of the latter, 2441/3065 (79.7%) underwent MRI with preoperative intent (P-MRI subgroup), 510/3065 (16.6%) D-MRI, and 114/3065 S-MRI (3.7%). The reoperation rate was 10.5% for S-MRI, 8.2% for D-MRI, and 8.5% for P-MRI, while it was 11.7% for noMRI (p ≤ 0.023 for comparisons with D-MRI and P-MRI). The overall mastectomy rate (first-line mastectomy plus conversions from conserving surgery to mastectomy) was 39.5% for S-MRI, 36.2% for P-MRI, 24.1% for D-MRI, and 18.0% for noMRI. At multivariable analysis, using noMRI as reference, the odds ratios for overall mastectomy were 2.4 (p < 0.001) for S-MRI, 1.0 (p = 0.957) for D-MRI, and 1.9 (p < 0.001) for P-MRI. CONCLUSIONS Patients from the D-MRI subgroup had the lowest overall mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). This analysis offers an insight into how the initial indication for MRI affects the subsequent surgical treatment of breast cancer. KEY POINTS • Of 3065 breast MRI examinations, 79.7% were performed with preoperative intent (P-MRI), 16.6% were diagnostic (D-MRI), and 3.7% were screening (S-MRI) examinations. • The D-MRI subgroup had the lowest mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). • The S-MRI subgroup had the highest mastectomy rate (39.5%) which aligns with higher-than-average risk in this subgroup, with a reoperation rate (10.5%) not significantly different to that of all other subgroups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Cozzi
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Giovanni Di Leo
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- The Daffodil Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney (Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW), Sydney, Australia
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
- BioMaps (UMR1281), INSERM, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Massimo Bazzocchi
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Peter Bult
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- Unit of Oncological and Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy
| | | | - Francesco Cartia
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Catherine Depretto
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Valeria Dominelli
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gábor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, MHEK Teaching Hospital, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Rossano Girometti
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Steven E Harms
- Breast Center of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
| | - Sarah Hilborne
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Raffaele Ienzi
- Department of Radiology, Di.Bi.MED, Policlinico Universitario Paolo Giaccone, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Marc B I Lobbes
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Claudio Losio
- Department of Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Inge-Marie Obdeijn
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Umit A Ozcan
- Unit of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Heike Preibsch
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | | | | | - Daniela Sacchetto
- Kiwifarm S.r.l, La Morra, Italy
- Disaster Medicine Service 118, ASL CN1, Saluzzo, Italy
- CRIMEDIM, Research Center in Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale "Amedeo Avogadro", Novara, Italy
| | | | - Margrethe Schlooz
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Botond K Szabó
- Department of Radiology, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Donna B Taylor
- Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
- Department of Radiology, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia
| | - Özden S Ulus
- Unit of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Mireille Van Goethem
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Radiology, Multidisciplinary Breast Clinic, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium
| | - Jeroen Veltman
- Maatschap Radiologie Oost-Nederland, Oldenzaal, The Netherlands
| | - Stefanie Weigel
- Institute of Clinical Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Evelyn Wenkel
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pan IW, Yen TW, Bedrosian I, Shih YCT. Current Trends in the Utilization of Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Among Women With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer. JCO Oncol Pract 2023; 19:446-455. [PMID: 37071025 PMCID: PMC10337726 DOI: 10.1200/op.22.00578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 02/06/2023] [Accepted: 02/21/2023] [Indexed: 04/19/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The clinical benefit of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for early-stage breast cancer (BC) remains controversial. We examined trends and the associated factors of preoperative breast MRI use. METHODS This study cohort, constructed from Optum Clinformatics database, included women with early-stage BC who had a cancer surgery between March 1, 2008, and December 31, 2020. Preoperative breast MRI was performed between the date of BC diagnosis and index surgery. Multivariable logistic regressions, one for elderly (65 years and older) and the other for non-elderly patients (younger than 65 years), were performed to examine factors associated with the use of preoperative MRI. RESULTS Among 92,077 women with early-stage BC, the crude rate of preoperative breast MRI increased from 48% in 2008 to 60% in 2020 for nonelderly and from 27% to 34% for elderly women. For both age groups, non-Hispanic Blacks were less likely (odds ratio [OR]; 95% CI, younger than 65 years: 0.75, 0.70 to 0.81; 65 years and older: 0.77, 0.72 to 0.83) to receive preoperative MRI than non-Hispanic White patients. Across Census divisions, the highest adjusted rate was observed in Mountain division (OR compared with New England; 95% CI, younger than 65 years: 1.45, 1.27 to 1.65; 65 years and older: 2.42, 2.16 to 2.72). Other factors included younger age, fewer comorbidities, family history of BC, axillary node involvement, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for both age groups. CONCLUSION The use of preoperative breast MRI has steadily increased. Aside from clinical factors, age, race/ethnicity, and geographic location were associated with preoperative MRI use. This information is important for future implementation or deimplementation strategies of preoperative MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I-Wen Pan
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Tina W.F. Yen
- Department of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - Isabelle Bedrosian
- Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Ya-Chen Tina Shih
- Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Giaquinto AN, Sung H, Miller KD, Kramer JL, Newman LA, Minihan A, Jemal A, Siegel RL. Breast Cancer Statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022; 72:524-541. [PMID: 36190501 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21754] [Citation(s) in RCA: 706] [Impact Index Per Article: 353.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2022] [Accepted: 08/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
This article is the American Cancer Society's update on female breast cancer statistics in the United States, including population-based data on incidence, mortality, survival, and mammography screening. Breast cancer incidence rates have risen in most of the past four decades; during the most recent data years (2010-2019), the rate increased by 0.5% annually, largely driven by localized-stage and hormone receptor-positive disease. In contrast, breast cancer mortality rates have declined steadily since their peak in 1989, albeit at a slower pace in recent years (1.3% annually from 2011 to 2020) than in the previous decade (1.9% annually from 2002 to 2011). In total, the death rate dropped by 43% during 1989-2020, translating to 460,000 fewer breast cancer deaths during that time. The death rate declined similarly for women of all racial/ethnic groups except American Indians/Alaska Natives, among whom the rates were stable. However, despite a lower incidence rate in Black versus White women (127.8 vs. 133.7 per 100,000), the racial disparity in breast cancer mortality remained unwavering, with the death rate 40% higher in Black women overall (27.6 vs. 19.7 deaths per 100,000 in 2016-2020) and two-fold higher among adult women younger than 50 years (12.1 vs. 6.5 deaths per 100,000). Black women have the lowest 5-year relative survival of any racial/ethnic group for every molecular subtype and stage of disease (except stage I), with the largest Black-White gaps in absolute terms for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative disease (88% vs. 96%), hormone receptor-negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive disease (78% vs. 86%), and stage III disease (64% vs. 77%). Progress against breast cancer mortality could be accelerated by mitigating racial disparities through increased access to high-quality screening and treatment via nationwide Medicaid expansion and partnerships between community stakeholders, advocacy organizations, and health systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela N Giaquinto
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Hyuna Sung
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Kimberly D Miller
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Joan L Kramer
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Lisa A Newman
- Department of Surgery, New York-Presbyterian, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | - Adair Minihan
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Ahmedin Jemal
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Rebecca L Siegel
- Surveillance and Health Equity Science, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kim SY, Cho N. Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: A Review. J Breast Cancer 2022; 25:263-277. [PMID: 36031752 PMCID: PMC9411024 DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2022.25.e35] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Revised: 07/13/2022] [Accepted: 07/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite the high sensitivity and widespread use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the American Cancer Society and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines do not recommend the routine use of preoperative MRI owing to the conflicting results and lack of clear benefit to the surgical outcome (reoperation and mastectomy) and long-term clinical outcomes (local recurrence and metachronous contralateral breast cancer). Preoperative MRI detects additional cancers that are occult at mammography and ultrasound but increases the rate of mastectomy. Concerns about overdiagnosis and overtreatment of preoperative MRI might be mitigated by adjusting the confounding factors when conducting studies, using the state-of-the-art image-guided biopsy technique, applying the radiologists’ cumulative experiences in interpreting MRI findings, and performing multiple lumpectomies in patients with multicentric cancer. Among the various imaging methods, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI has the highest accuracy in predicting pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Prospective trials aimed at applying the MRI information to the de-escalation of surgical or radiation treatments are underway. In this review, current studies on the clinical outcomes of preoperative breast MRI are updated, and circumstances in which MRI may be useful for surgical planning are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Soo-Yeon Kim
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.,Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Nariya Cho
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.,Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
El Masri J, Phadke S. Breast Cancer Epidemiology and Contemporary Breast Cancer Care: A Review of the Literature and Clinical Applications. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2022; 65:461-481. [PMID: 35703213 DOI: 10.1097/grf.0000000000000721] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Substantial progress has been made in contemporary breast cancer care, resulting in a consistently declining breast cancer mortality rate and an improvement in quality of life. Advancements include deescalation of therapy in low-risk populations and refining systemic therapy options. Research into molecular biomarkers continues to evolve and holds the promise of achieving the goal of precision medicine, while guidelines for supportive care and survivorship have been created to address the needs of an ever-increasing number of breast cancer survivors. A collaborative, multidisciplinary team approach is essential for patients and survivors to achieve optimal outcomes and enjoy productive high-quality lives. Gynecologists, in particular, play a key role in screening and survivorship care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jad El Masri
- Department of Internal Medicine, UIHC Cancer Services-Quad Cities, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine
| | - Sneha Phadke
- Department of Internal Medicine, Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Maimone S, Morozov AP, Li Z, Craver EC, Elder EA, McLaughlin SA. Additional Workups Recommended During Preoperative Breast MRI: Methods to Gain Efficiency and Limit Confusion. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:3839-3848. [PMID: 35258769 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11476-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2021] [Accepted: 01/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Preoperative breast MRI is indicated for staging but can lead to complex imaging workups. This study reviewed imaging recommendations made on preoperative MRI exams, to simplify management approaches for patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. METHODS This retrospective single-institution review was restricted to women with breast cancer who underwent staging MRI. Additional breast lesions, separate from index tumors, recommended for additional workup or surveillance were assessed to see which were detected and which characteristics predicted success in detection. Univariate mixed-effects logistic modeling predicted the likelihood of finding lesions using MRI-directed ultrasound (US), with odds ratios reported. Tests were two-sided, with a p value lower than 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS In this study, 534 (39.6%) patients had recommendations for additional workup after preoperative MRI. MRI detected additional malignancy in 178 patients (33.3%). Half of the 66 patients who refused an additional workup and opted for mastectomy had additional malignancies at mastectomy. MRI-directed US was 14 times more likely to detect masses than nonmass enhancement (NME) (p < 0.001). NME was detected on US in only 16% of cases, with one third of subsequent biopsy results considered discordant. Probably benign assessments were given to 35 patients, with 23% not returning for follow-up evaluation and 7% returning at least 6 months later than recommended. CONCLUSION Use of preoperative breast MRI has increased. Although it can add value, institutions should establish indications and expectations to prevent unnecessary workups. Limiting MRI-directed US to masses, avoiding probably benign assessments, and consulting with patients after MRI but prior to workups can prevent unnecessary exams and confusion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Santo Maimone
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
| | - Andrey P Morozov
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Zhuo Li
- Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Emily C Craver
- Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Erin A Elder
- Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA.,Department of Surgery, Ochsner Medical Center, New Orleans, LA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Maimone S, McLaughlin SA. ASO Author Reflections: Optimizing Additional Workups from Preoperative Breast MRI. Ann Surg Oncol 2022; 29:3849-3850. [PMID: 35254581 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11482-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2022] [Accepted: 02/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Santo Maimone
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Li L, Zhang Q, Qian C, Lin H. Impact of Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging on Surgical Outcomes in Women with Invasive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Clin Pract 2022; 2022:6440952. [PMID: 36081810 PMCID: PMC9436630 DOI: 10.1155/2022/6440952] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2022] [Revised: 08/02/2022] [Accepted: 08/06/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Currently, whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be routinely applied to patients with breast cancer before surgery remains controversial. A pooled analysis of the association between preoperative MRI and surgical outcomes in female patients with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer was conducted to provide evidence-based medicine for clinical practice. METHODS Three independent researchers searched the following databases: PubMed, Medline, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to April 2022. Literature was included and excluded according to Cochrane's principles. The basic information from eligible documents was extracted. Systematic evaluation and meta-analysis were performed, and the odds ratio (OR) was analyzed by the random-effect model. The quality of the literature was assessed using the modified Jadad scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) mean scale. RESULTS A total of 19 studies were included, including 4 randomized controlled trials and 15 observational comparative studies. Among them, most studies were not limited to a specific pathological type, with the exception of 3 that were limited to invasive lobular carcinoma. The results showed that preoperative MRI examination would significantly reduce the reoperation rate (OR = 0.77, P=0.02) and increase the mastectomy rate (OR = 1.36, P=0.001). In comparison, preoperative MRI did not significantly affect the rate of secondary mastectomy (OR = 0.77, P=0.02), the rate of positive margin (OR = 1.08, P=0.66), the rate of mastectomy (OR = 1.00, P < 0.05), and reoperations (OR = 0.65, P=0.19) in the subgroup analysis of patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. CONCLUSION Available evidence suggests that preoperative MRI examination increases the rate of mastectomy and reduces the rate of reoperations. The results indicate that preoperative MRI examination has the potential to benefit patients with breast cancer, but more high-quality studies are needed for confirmation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Li Li
- Department of Medical Imaging, Haikou Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Haikou 570203, China
| | - Qinghong Zhang
- Department of Breast Surgery, Haikou Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Haikou 570203, China
| | - Chunrui Qian
- Department of Radiology, Haikou Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Haikou 570216, China
| | - Huien Lin
- Department of Medical Imaging, Haikou Maternal and Child Health Hospital, Haikou 570203, China
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Li W, Li X. Development of intraoperative assessment of margins in breast conserving surgery: a narrative review. Gland Surg 2022; 11:258-269. [PMID: 35242687 PMCID: PMC8825505 DOI: 10.21037/gs-21-652] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2021] [Accepted: 11/17/2021] [Indexed: 07/28/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We intend to provide an informative and up-to-date summary on the topic of intraoperative assessment of margins in breast conserving surgery (BCS). Conventional methods as well as cutting-edge technologies are analyzed for their advantages and limitations in the hope that clinicians can turn to this for reference. This review can also offer guidance for technicians in the future design of intraoperative margin assessment tools. BACKGROUND Achieving negative margins during BCS is one of the vital factors for preventing local recurrence. Conducting intraoperative margin assessment can ensure negative margins to a large extent and possibly relieve patients of the anguish of re-interventions. In recent years, innovative methods for margin assessment during BCS are advancing rapidly. And there is a lack of summary regarding the development of intraoperative margin assessment in BCS. METHODS A PubMed search with keywords "intraoperative margin assessment" and "breast conserving surgery" was conducted. Relevant publications were screened manually for its title, abstract and even full text to determine its true relevance. Publications on neo-adjuvant therapy and intraoperative radiotherapy were excluded. References from the searched articles and other supplementary articles were also looked into. CONCLUSIONS Conventional methods for margin assessment yields stable outcome but its use is limited because of the demand on pathology staff and the trade-off between time and precision. Conventional imaging techniques pass the workload to radiologists at the cost of a significantly low duration of time. Involving artificial intelligence for image-based assessment is a further improvement. However, conventional imaging is inherently flawed in that occult lesions can't show on the image and the showing ones are ambiguous and open to interpretation. Unconventional techniques which base their judgment on cellular composition are more reassuring. Nonetheless, unconventional techniques should be subjected to clinical trials before putting into practice. And studies regarding comparison between conventional methods and unconventional methods are also needed to evaluate their relative efficacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wanheng Li
- First Clinical Medical School, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xiru Li
- Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Dong H, Kang L, Cheng S, Zhang R. Diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer detection: An update meta-analysis. Thorac Cancer 2021; 12:3201-3207. [PMID: 34668649 PMCID: PMC8636198 DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.14187] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/26/2021] [Revised: 09/25/2021] [Accepted: 09/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE‐MRI) for breast cancer identification. Methods A comprehensive electronic systematic searching of Medline, Ovid, EMBASE, Web of Science, CNK, and Cochrane Library databases was performed up to 2 August 2021. Clinical studies associated with DCE‐MRI for breast cancer detection were screened and inlcuded in the meta‐analysis. The data of true positive(tp), false positive(fp), false negative(fn) and true negative(tn) was extracted from includded studies. The sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) were pooled under fixed or random effect models. Publication bias was evaluated by Deek's funnel plot. Results A final set of 15 studies with 1321 breast lesions were included in the present work. The pooled diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and DOR were 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81–0.92), 0.74 (95% CI 0.68–0.80), and 18.83 (95% CI 9.07–36.54), respectively, and the area under the SROC was 0.86 (95% CI 0.82–0.88). Given a pretest probability of 50%, the positive post‐test probability was 77%, and the negative post‐test probability was 14%. Deek's funnel plot indicated low publication bias (p = 0.61). Conclusion DCE‐MRI is a noninvasive method of breast cancer diagnosis for suspected malignant breast lesions with relative high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Honghuan Dong
- Department of MRI, Cang Zhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou, China
| | - Linqing Kang
- Department of MRI, Cang Zhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou, China
| | - Sijia Cheng
- Department of MRI, Cang Zhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou, China
| | - Rongju Zhang
- Department of Pathology, Cang Zhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Which Patients With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Benefit From Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging? Int Surg 2021. [DOI: 10.9738/intsurg-d-20-00012.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective
The aim of this study was to identify the effectiveness and selective applications of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) by investigating clinicopathologic factors of the index tumor with or without false lesions on MRI.
Summary of background data
Preoperative MRI is commonly performed in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, but its clinical significance is unclear.
Methods
A total of 103 breast cancer patients who had undergone MRI or ultrasound followed by mastectomy were included in this retrospective investigation of pathologic, clinical, and imaging findings.
Results
MRI showed 29 false-positive lesions in 57 patients, 5 false-negative lesions in 5 patients, and 69 true-positive lesions in 103 patients. More false lesions on MRI were found in patients with more lesions on ultrasound, small-sized index tumors on ultrasound, or early-stage cancer. The sensitivity of MRI and ultrasound were 96.5% and 92.3% (P = 0.119), respectively, and the positive predictive value of them were 71.5% and 72.5% (P = 0.828), respectively.
Conclusions
Preoperative MRI is more useful in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer who have large-sized or more advanced cancers or fewer lesions on ultrasound.
Collapse
|
14
|
Davey MG, Davey MS, Ryan ÉJ, Boland MR, McAnena PF, Lowery AJ, Kerin MJ. Is radiomic MRI a feasible alternative to OncotypeDX® recurrence score testing? A systematic review and meta-analysis. BJS Open 2021; 5:6388195. [PMID: 34633438 PMCID: PMC8504445 DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrab081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/09/2021] [Accepted: 08/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND OncotypeDX® recurrence score (RS) aids therapeutic decision-making in oestrogen-receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer. Radiomics is an evolving field that aims to examine the relationship between radiological features and the underlying genomic landscape of disease processes. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of current evidence evaluating the comparability of radiomics and RS. METHODS A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing radiomic MRI tumour analyses and RS were identified. Sensitivity, specificity and area under curve (AUC) delineating low risk (RS less than 18) versus intermediate-high risk (equal to or greater than 18) and low-intermediate risk (RS less than 30) and high risk (RS greater than 30) were recorded. Log rate ratios (lnRR) and standard error were determined from AUC and 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS Nine studies including 1216 patients met inclusion criteria; the mean age at diagnosis was 52.9 years. Mean RS was 16 (range 0-75); 401 patients with RS less than 18, 287 patients with RS 18-30 and 100 patients with RS greater than 30. Radiomic analysis and RS were comparable for differentiating RS less than 18 versus RS 18 or greater (RR 0.93 (95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 1.01); P = 0.010, heterogeneity (I2)=0%) as well as RS less than 30 versus RS 30 or greater (RR 0.76 (95 per cent c.i. 0.70 to 0.83); P < 0.001, I2=0%). MRI sensitivity and specificity for RS less than 18 versus 18 or greater was 0.89 (95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 0.93) and 0.72 (95 per cent c.i. 0.66 to 0.78) respectively, and 0.79 (95 per cent c.i. 0.72 to 0.86) and 0.74 (95 per cent c.i. 0.68 to 0.80) for RS less than 30 versus 30 or greater. CONCLUSION Radiomic tumour analysis is comparable to RS in differentiating patients into clinically relevant subgroups. For patients requiring MRI, radiomics may complement and enhance RS for prognostication and therapeutic decision making in ER+ breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M G Davey
- Department of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - M S Davey
- Department of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - É J Ryan
- Department of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - M R Boland
- Department of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - P F McAnena
- Department of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - A J Lowery
- Department of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - M J Kerin
- Department of Surgery, The Lambe Institute for Translational Research, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Park AR, Chae EY, Cha JH, Shin HJ, Choi WJ, Kim HH. Preoperative Breast MRI in Women 35 Years of Age and Younger with Breast Cancer: Benefits in Surgical Outcomes by Using Propensity Score Analysis. Radiology 2021; 300:39-45. [PMID: 33876970 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2021204124] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Background The role of preoperative MRI in women 35 years of age or younger with breast cancer remains controversial. Purpose To determine the association between preoperative MRI and surgical outcomes in women aged 35 years or younger with breast cancer by using propensity score (PS) analysis to investigate the impact of preoperative MRI. Materials and Methods Women 35 years of age or younger diagnosed with breast cancer between 2007 and 2017 who had or had not undergone preoperative breast MRI were retrospectively identified. The MRI detection rate of additional suspicious lesions was analyzed, and changes in surgical management were recorded. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) and PS matching were used to adjust 19 variables and to create a balance between the two groups. Surgical outcomes were compared by using univariable logistic regression. Results Among 964 women (mean age ± standard deviation, 32 years ± 3), 665 (69%) had undergone preoperative MRI (MRI group; mean age, 32 years ± 3) and 299 (31%) had not (no-MRI group; mean age, 32 years ± 3). In the MRI group, additional suspicious lesions were found in 178 of the 665 women (27%), with 88 of those 178 women (49%) having malignant lesions. The surgical management was changed in 99 of the 665 women (15%) due to MRI findings, which was appropriate for 62 of those 99 women (63%). In the IPW analysis, the MRI group showed lower odds of repeat surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.13; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.21; P < .001) and higher odds of initial mastectomy (OR, 1.62; 95% CI: 1.17, 2.25; P = .004). However, there was no difference in the overall mastectomy rate (OR, 1.24; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.68; P = .17) compared with the no-MRI group. These results were consistent when using the PS matching method. Conclusion Preoperative MRI in young women with breast cancer is useful for detecting additional malignancy and improving surgical outcomes by reducing the repeat surgery rate, with a similar likelihood of overall mastectomy. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ah Reum Park
- From the Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Eun Young Chae
- From the Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Joo Hee Cha
- From the Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Hee Jung Shin
- From the Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Woo Jung Choi
- From the Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea
| | - Hak Hee Kim
- From the Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-Gil, Songpa-Gu, Seoul 05505, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|