Contribution of mammography to MRI screening in BRCA mutation carriers by BRCA status and age: individual patient data meta-analysis

Clinical experience on the limited role of ultrasound for breast cancer screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations carriers aged 30-39 years

PURPOSE

In BRCA germline pathogenic sequence variants (PSV) carriers aged 30-39 years imaging is recommended at six-month intervals. The European society for medical oncology recommendation of the use of 6-monthly MRI six-monthly MRI screening is being considered at our institution, particularly for younger carriers under the age of 35, although it is not mandatory. If 6-monthly MRI is unavailable, annual MRI may be supplemented by ultrasound (with or without mammography). The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of ultrasound screening added to mammography, as a 6-month supplement to annual MRI in BRCA PSV carriers aged 30-39 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This IRB approved retrospective study included BRCA PSV carriers aged 30-39 years, who underwent breast cancer screening at our institution between January 2015 and March 2023. Participants were divided into two groups, those who had supplemental whole-breast US and mammography at six months and underwent screening before March 2019, and those who had only mammography without supplemental US and enrolled in screening after March 2019. Patient characteristics, cancer detection rates and cancer characteristics were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 200 asymptomatic BRCA1/2 PSV carriers undergoing screening in our institution were included in the study. Mean age was 35.7 ± 3.5 years, and mean follow-up time was 37.4 ± 38.0 months. There were 118 (59 %) women screened with supplemental US, and 82 (41 %) women without. Eight cancers were diagnosed during the study period, four in women with supplemental US and four in women without. The sensitivity of whole-breast screening US was 25 % (1/4), specificity 85.7 % (222/259), PPV 2.6 % (1/38), and NPV 98.7 % (222/225). Of the four cancers detected in women screened with supplemental US, one was diagnosed by whole-breast US, two by MRI, and one by mammography. Of eight cancers included in this study, two were not detectable by targeted second-look US. All eight cancers were detectable by MRI.

CONCLUSION

The addition of whole-breast ultrasound to mammography and MRI screening in BRCA PSV carriers aged 30-39 years offered limited incremental benefit. MRI with 6 months supplemental mammography without US detected all cancer cases.

Contrast-enhanced Mammography versus MR Imaging of the Breast

Breast MR imaging and contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) are both techniques that employ intravenously injected contrast agent to assess breast lesions. This approach is associated with a very high sensitivity for malignant lesions that typically exhibit rapid enhancement due to the leakiness of neovasculature. CEM may be readily available at the breast imaging department and can be performed on the spot. Breast MR imaging provides stronger enhancement than the x-ray-based techniques and offers higher sensitivity. From a patient perspective, both modalities have their benefits and downsides; thus, patient preference could also play a role in the selection of the imaging technique.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Female Breast Cancer Screening: 2023 Update

Early detection of breast cancer from regular screening substantially reduces breast cancer mortality and morbidity. Multiple different imaging modalities may be used to screen for breast cancer. Screening recommendations differ based on an individual's risk of developing breast cancer. Numerous factors contribute to breast cancer risk, which is frequently divided into three major categories: average, intermediate, and high risk. For patients assigned female at birth with native breast tissue, mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis are the recommended method for breast cancer screening in all risk categories. In addition to the recommendation of mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis in high-risk patients, screening with breast MRI is recommended. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Awareness, Knowledge, and Current Practice of Breast Cancer Among Surgeons in Jordan

PURPOSE

Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent cancer in Jordan. De-escalation in treatment reflects a paradigm shift in BC treatment. More tailored strategies and the adoption of a multidisciplinary approach are essential to apply recent changes in management. In the era of breast surgery fellowship, adopting well-structured training is essential to apply recent therapeutic guidelines and meet patients' expectations.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study using a customized, self-reported questionnaire was used. Data collection occurred anonymously using a link via WhatsApp in the period between February 2023 and April 2023.

RESULTS

A total of 89 surgeons were involved in this study, and only 14 (15.7%) completed a subspecialty in breast surgery. About 58.4% considered the age of 40 years as the starting point for screening, and 84.3% reported that mammogram screening is associated with improved BC survival. Only 10.1% and 28.1% acknowledged the applicability of both tomosynthesis and breast magnetic resonance imaging in screening, respectively. A significant difference in the mean knowledge score about BC is observed between general surgeon and those with subspecialty. Varying levels of awareness concerning different risk factors and their correlation with the likelihood of BC occurrence observed. Although 56.2% of participants could offer breast conserving surgery and consider it oncological safe, only 48.3% defined it correctly. Of the participants, 61.8% and 76.4% stated that sentinel lymph node biopsy can be safely applied in clinically negative or suspicious axillary nodes, respectively, with <50% of surgeon performing it in their practice.

CONCLUSION

More efforts are required to enhance the knowledge and practice of surgeons in the field of breast surgery. Adopting national guidelines can facilitate the acceptance and improvement of current practices among surgeons in Jordan.

Screening in Women With BRCA Mutations Revisited

Patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations are at high risk for the development of breast cancer. This article reviews the current evidence for breast cancer screening of patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 pathogenic gene mutations if they have not undergone prophylactic mastectomy. It will review the current evidence-based imaging recommendations for different modalities and ages of screening initiation in screening this patient population at high risk. Special considerations in transgender BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are also discussed.

Implementing the National Dense Breast Reporting Standard, Expanding Supplemental Screening Using Current Guidelines, and the Proposed Find It Early Act

Thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia (DC) have dense breast notification laws that mandate varying levels of patient notification about breast density after a mammogram, and these cover over 90% of American women. On March 10, 2023, the Food and Drug Administration issued a final rule amending regulations under the Mammography Quality Standards Act for a national dense breast reporting standard for both patient results letters and mammogram reports. Effective September 10, 2024, letters will be required to tell a woman her breasts are "dense" or "not dense," that dense tissue makes it harder to find cancers on a mammogram, and that it increases the risk of developing cancer. Women with dense breasts will also be told that other imaging tests in addition to a mammogram may help find cancers. The specific density category can be added (eg, if mandated by a state "inform" law). Reports to providers must include the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System density category. Implementing appropriate supplemental screening should be based on patient risk for missed breast cancer on mammography; such assessment should include consideration of breast density and other risk factors. This article discusses strategies for implementation. Currently 21 states and DC have varying insurance laws for supplemental breast imaging; in addition, Oklahoma requires coverage for diagnostic breast imaging. A federal insurance bill, the Find It Early Act, has been introduced that would ensure no-cost screening and diagnostic imaging for women with dense breasts or at increased risk and close loopholes in state laws.

Recommandations francophones pour la pratique clinique concernant la prise en charge des cancers du sein de Saint-Paul-de-Vence 2022-2023

With more than 60,000 new cases of breast cancer in mainland France in 2023 and 8% of all cancer deaths, breast cancer is the leading cancer in women in terms of incidence and mortality. While the number of new cases has almost doubled in 30 years, the percentage of patients at all stages alive at 5 years (87%) and 10 years (76%) testifies to the major progress made in terms of screening, characterisation and treatment. However, this progress, rapid as it is, needs to be evaluated and integrated into an overall strategy, taking into account the characteristics of the disease (stage and biology), as well as those of the patients being treated. These are the objectives of the St Paul-de-Vence recommendations for clinical practice. We report here the summary of the votes, discussions and conclusions of the Saint-Paul-de-Vence 2022-2023 RPCs.

Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Higher-Than-Average Risk: Updated Recommendations From the ACR

Early detection decreases breast cancer death. The ACR recommends annual screening beginning at age 40 for women of average risk and earlier and/or more intensive screening for women at higher-than-average risk. For most women at higher-than-average risk, the supplemental screening method of choice is breast MRI. Women with genetics-based increased risk, those with a calculated lifetime risk of 20% or more, and those exposed to chest radiation at young ages are recommended to undergo MRI surveillance starting at ages 25 to 30 and annual mammography (with a variable starting age between 25 and 40, depending on the type of risk). Mutation carriers can delay mammographic screening until age 40 if annual screening breast MRI is performed as recommended. Women diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 or with personal histories of breast cancer and dense breasts should undergo annual supplemental breast MRI. Others with personal histories, and those with atypia at biopsy, should strongly consider MRI screening, especially if other risk factors are present. For women with dense breasts who desire supplemental screening, breast MRI is recommended. For those who qualify for but cannot undergo breast MRI, contrast-enhanced mammography or ultrasound could be considered. All women should undergo risk assessment by age 25, especially Black women and women of Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, so that those at higher-than-average risk can be identified and appropriate screening initiated.

Recommendations for the Screening of Breast Cancer of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Brazilian Society of Mastology and Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Association

OBJECTIVE

 To present the update of the recommendations of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, the Brazilian Society of Mastology and the Brazilian Federation of Associations of Gynecology and Obstetrics for breast cancer screening in Brazil.

METHODS

 Scientific evidence published in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, CINAHL and Lilacs databases between January 2012 and July 2022 was searched. Recommendations were based on this evidence by consensus of the expert committee of the three entities.

RECOMMENDATIONS

 Annual mammography screening is recommended for women at usual risk aged 40-74 years. Above 75 years, it should be reserved for those with a life expectancy greater than seven years. Women at higher than usual risk, including those with dense breasts, with a personal history of atypical lobular hyperplasia, classic lobular carcinoma in situ, atypical ductal hyperplasia, treatment for breast cancer or chest irradiation before age 30, or even, carriers of a genetic mutation or with a strong family history, benefit from complementary screening, and should be considered individually. Tomosynthesis is a form of mammography and should be considered in screening whenever accessible and available.

Uptake of BRCA1/BRCA2 predictive genetic testing in an Irish population is low: a missed opportunity

INTRODUCTION

Predictive testing for BRCA1 or BRCA2 allows at-risk individuals to engage with appropriate screening and treatment services if a pathogenic mutation is identified. Previous studies have shown uptake of predictive testing to most commonly range between 20% and 40% (Table 2). This represents a missed cancer prevention opportunity. Possible explanations for this low uptake include lack of disclosure of at-risk status to relatives, lack of awareness of cancer genetics services, or patient preference. The goal of the current study was to investigate the uptake of BRCA1 or BRCA2 predictive testing in an Irish population.

METHODS

We performed a multicentre, retrospective analysis of 63 pedigrees from two Irish tertiary referral hospitals over a five-year period (2012-2017). Family pedigrees were reviewed to identify at-risk family members eligible for predictive BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation testing as per international guidelines, and testing rates were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 1048 eligible individuals were identified, 318 (30.4%) proceeded to BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline testing including [215 (37.5%) females and 99 males (21.5%)]. Women were significantly more likely to test than men (T = 3.7, p < .0002). Uptake of testing was significant higher amongst first-degree relatives 45% (150/323) compared to 20% (50/258) amongst second degree relatives, and 10 % (33/317) amongst more distant relatives (F = 25.32, p < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Uptake of BRCA1 OR BRCA2 mutation testing in Ireland is suboptimal, particularly amongst Irish males and distant relatives. Further research is needed to identify strategies which may improve uptake within current legal and ethical frameworks.

Recommendations for breast cancer screening in Brazil, from the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, the Brazilian Society of Mastology, and the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations

Objective

To present an update of the recommendations of the Brazilian College of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, the Brazilian Society of Mastology, and the Brazilian Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Associations for breast cancer screening in Brazil.

Materials and Methods

Scientific evidence published between January 2012 and July 2022 was gathered from the following databases: Medline (PubMed); Excerpta Medica (Embase); Cochrane Library; Ebsco; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (Cinahl); and Latin-American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (Lilacs). Recommendations were based on that evidence and were arrived at by consensus of a joint committee of experts from the three entities.Recommendations: Annual mammographic screening is recommended for women between 40 and 74 years of age. For women at or above the age of 75, screening should be reserved for those with a life expectancy greater than seven years. Women at higher than average risk are considered by category: those with dense breasts; those with a personal history of atypical lobular hyperplasia, classical lobular carcinoma in situ, or atypical ductal hyperplasia; those previously treated for breast cancer; those having undergone thoracic radiotherapy before age 30; and those with a relevant genetic mutation or a strong family history. The benefits of complementary screening are also addressed according to the subcategories above. The use of tomosynthesis, which is an evolved form of mammography, should be considered in screening, whenever accessible and available.

Deep learning for predicting future lesion emergence in high-risk breast MRI screening: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

International societies have issued guidelines for high-risk breast cancer (BC) screening, recommending contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) of the breast as a supplemental diagnostic tool. In our study, we tested the applicability of deep learning-based anomaly detection to identify anomalous changes in negative breast CE-MRI screens associated with future lesion emergence.

METHODS

In this prospective study, we trained a generative adversarial network on dynamic CE-MRI of 33 high-risk women who participated in a screening program but did not develop BC. We defined an anomaly score as the deviation of an observed CE-MRI scan from the model of normal breast tissue variability. We evaluated the anomaly score's association with future lesion emergence on the level of local image patches (104,531 normal patches, 455 patches of future lesion location) and entire CE-MRI exams (21 normal, 20 with future lesion). Associations were analyzed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves on the patch level and logistic regression on the examination level.

RESULTS

The local anomaly score on image patches was a good predictor for future lesion emergence (area under the ROC curve 0.804). An exam-level summary score was significantly associated with the emergence of lesions at any location at a later time point (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer lesions are associated with anomalous appearance changes in breast CE-MRI occurring before the lesion emerges in high-risk women. These early image signatures are detectable and may be a basis for adjusting individual BC risk and personalized screening.

RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Anomalies in screening MRI preceding lesion emergence in women at high-risk of breast cancer may inform individualized screening and intervention strategies.

KEY POINTS

• Breast lesions are associated with preceding anomalies in CE-MRI of high-risk women. • Deep learning-based anomaly detection can help to adjust risk assessment for future lesions. • An appearance anomaly score may be used for adjusting screening interval times.

Implementation of BRCA mutations testing in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples of different cancer types

BRCA1 and BRCA2 are onco-suppressor genes involved in the DNA repair mechanism. The presence of BRCA1/2 mutations confers a higher risk of developing several cancer types. To date, the FDA approved various PARP inhibitors to treat selected BRCA1/2 mutated oncologic patients. At first, PARP inhibitors were approved for patients with ovarian and breast cancers, and subsequently for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after the treatment with chemotherapy. The current guidelines for BRCA testing are very heterogeneous between the different types of tumors regarding the diagnostic algorithm and the type of sample to analyze, such as the blood for the germline mutations and the tumoral tissue for the somatic mutations. Few data have currently been described regarding the detection of BRCA1/2 somatic mutations in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples. In this review, we propose an overview of the BRCA mutations in FFPE samples of several cancers, including breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal, prostate, and pancreatic cancer. We summarize the types and the frequency of BRCA mutations, the guidelines approved for the test, the molecular assays used for the detection and the PARP inhibitors approved for each tumor type.

Breast MRI: Clinical Indications, Recommendations, and Future Applications in Breast Cancer Diagnosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article aims to provide an updated overview of the indications for diagnostic breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), discusses the available and novel imaging exams proposed for breast cancer detection, and discusses considerations when performing breast MRI in the clinical setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Breast MRI is superior in identifying lesions in women with a very high risk of breast cancer or average risk with dense breasts. Moreover, the application of breast MRI has benefits in numerous other clinical cases as well; e.g., the assessment of the extent of disease, evaluation of response to neoadjuvant therapy (NAT), evaluation of lymph nodes and primary occult tumor, evaluation of lesions suspicious of Paget's disease, and suspicious discharge and breast implants. Breast cancer is the most frequently detected tumor among women around the globe and is often diagnosed as a result of abnormal findings on mammography. Although effective multimodal therapies significantly decline mortality rates, breast cancer remains one of the leading causes of cancer death. A proactive approach to identifying suspicious breast lesions at early stages can enhance the efficacy of anti-cancer treatments, improve patient recovery, and significantly improve long-term survival. However, the currently applied mammography to detect breast cancer has its limitations. High false-positive and false-negative rates are observed in women with dense breasts. Since approximately half of the screening population comprises women with dense breasts, mammography is often incorrectly used. The application of breast MRI should significantly impact the correct cases of breast abnormality detection in women. Radiomics provides valuable data obtained from breast MRI, further improving breast cancer diagnosis. Introducing these constantly evolving algorithms in clinical practice will lead to the right breast detection tool, optimized surveillance program, and individualized breast cancer treatment.

MRI Breast: Current Imaging Trends, Clinical Applications, and Future Research Directions

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive and advanced imaging technique in diagnosing breast cancer and is essential in improving cancer detection, lesion characterization, and determining therapy response. In addition to the dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) technique, functional techniques such as magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI), and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) further characterize and differentiate benign and malignant lesions thus, improving diagnostic accuracy. There is now an increasing clinical usage of MRI breast, including screening in high risk and supplementary screening tools in average-risk patients. MRI is becoming imperative in assisting breast surgeons in planning breast-conserving surgery for preoperative local staging and evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy response. Other clinical applications for MRI breast include occult breast cancer detection, investigation of nipple discharge, and breast implant assessment. There is now an abundance of research publications on MRI Breast with several areas that still remain to be explored. This review gives a comprehensive overview of the clinical trends of MRI breast with emphasis on imaging features and interpretation using conventional and advanced techniques. In addition, future research areas in MRI breast include developing techniques to make MRI more accessible and costeffective for screening. The abbreviated MRI breast procedure and an area of focused research in the enhancement of radiologists' work with artificial intelligence have high impact for the future in MRI Breast.

Controversies and Open Questions in Management of Cancer-Free Carriers of Germline Pathogenic Variants in BRCA1/BRCA2

Females harboring germline BRCA1/BRCA2 (BRCA) P/LPV are offered a tight surveillance scheme from the age of 25−30 years, aimed at early detection of specific cancer types, in addition to risk-reducing strategies. Multiple national and international surveillance guidelines have been published and updated over the last two decades from geographically diverse countries. We searched for guidelines published between 1 January 2015 and 1 May 2022. Differences between guidelines on issues such as primary prevention, mammography screening in young (<30 years) carriers, MRI screening in carriers above age 65 years, breast imaging (if any) after risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy, during pregnancy, and breastfeeding, and hormone-replacement therapy, are just a few notable examples. Beyond formal guidelines, BRCA carriers’ concerns also focus on the timing of risk-reducing surgeries, fertility preservation, management of menopausal symptoms in cancer survivors, and pancreatic cancer surveillance, issues that, for some, there are no data to support evidence-based recommendations. This review discusses these unsettled issues, emphasizing the importance of future studies to enable global guideline harmonization for optimal surveillance strategies. Moreover, it raises the unmet need for personalized risk stratification and surveillance in BRCA P/LPV carriers.

Prevalent versus incident breast cancers: benefits of clinical and radiological monitoring in women with pathogenic BRCA1/2 variants

Women with pathogenic germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants have a higher risk of breast cancer than in the general population. International guidelines recommend specific clinical and radiological breast follow-up. This specific breast screening program has already been shown to be of clinical benefit, but no information is available concerning the use of prognostic factors or specific survival to guide follow-up decisions. We evaluated "high-risk" screening in a retrospective single-center study of 520 women carrying pathogenic germline variants of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene treated for breast cancer between January 2000 and December 2016. We compared two groups of women: the incidental breast cancer group (IBCG) were followed before breast cancer diagnosis (N = 103), whereas the prevalent breast cancer group (PBCG) (N = 417) had no specific follow-up for high risk before breast cancer diagnosis. Breast cancers were diagnosed at an earlier stage in the IBCG than in the PBCG: T0 in 64% versus 19% of tumors, (p < 0.00001), and N0 in 90% vs. 75% (p < 0.00001), respectively. Treatment differed significantly between the 2 groups: less neoadjuvant chemotherapy (7.1% vs. 28.5%, p < 0.00001), adjuvant chemotherapy (47.7% vs. 61.9%, p = 0.004) and more mastectomies (60% vs. 42% p < 0.0001) in the IBCG vs PBCG groups respectively. Overall and breast cancer-specific mortality were similar between the two groups. However, the patients in the IBCG had a significantly longer metastasis-free survival than those in the PBCG, at three years (96.9% [95% CI 93.5-100] vs. 92.30% [95% CI 89.8-94.9]; p = 0.02), suggesting a possible long-term survival advantage.

The yield and effectiveness of breast cancer surveillance in women with PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Women with PTEN Hamartoma Tumor Syndrome (PHTS) are offered breast cancer (BC) surveillance because of an increased BC lifetime risk. Surveillance guidelines are, however, expert opinion-based because of a lack of data. We aimed to assess the yield and effectiveness of BC surveillance and the prevalence and type of breast disease in women with PHTS.

METHODS

Sixty-five women with PHTS who visited our center between 2001 and 2021 were included. Surveillance consisted of annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography from ages 25 and 30 years, respectively.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine women enrolled in the BC surveillance program (median age at first examination, 38 years [range, 24-70]) and underwent 156 surveillance rounds. Surveillance led to detection of BC in 7/39 women (cancer detection rate [CDR], 45/1000 rounds) and benign breast lesions (BBLs) in 11/39 women. Overall sensitivity₂ (which excludes prophylactic-mastectomy detected BCs) was 100%, whereas sensitivity₂ of mammography and MRI alone was 50% and 100%, respectively. Overall specificity was higher in follow-up rounds (86%) versus first rounds (71%). Regardless of surveillance, 21/65 women developed 35 distinct BCs (median age at first diagnosis, 40 years [range, 24-59]) and 23/65 developed 89 BBLs (median age at first diagnosis, 38 years [range, 15-61]). Surveillance-detected BCs were all T1 and N0, whereas outside surveillance-detected BCs were more often ≥T2 (60%) and N+ (45%) (p < .005).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings show that annual BC surveillance with MRI starting at age 25 years enables detection of early-stage BCs. Performance measures of surveillance and CDR were both high. BBLs were commonly present, underlining the importance of evaluation of all lesions independently.

LAY SUMMARY

Breast cancer surveillance leads to decreased tumor stage and improved survival. Breast cancer surveillance with breast magnetic resonance imaging from age 25 years onward is recommended.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Imaging Modalities for Breast Cancer Surveillance Among BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: A Systematic Review

Background

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers are suggested with regular breast cancer surveillance screening strategies using mammography with supplementary MRI as an adjunct tool in Western countries. From a cost-effectiveness perspective, however, the benefits of screening modalities remain controversial among different mutated genes and screening schedules.

Methods

We searched the MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to collect and compare the results of different cost-effectiveness analyses. A simulated model was used to predict the impact of screening strategies in the target group on cost, life-year gained, quality-adjusted life years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Results

Nine cost-effectiveness studies were included. Combined mammography and MRI strategy is cost-effective in BRCA1 mutation carriers for the middle-aged group (age 35 to 54). BRCA2 mutation carriers are less likely to benefit from adjunct MRI screening, which implies that mammography alone would be sufficient from a cost-effectiveness perspective, regardless of dense breast cancer.

Conclusions

Precision screening strategies among BRCA1/2 mutation carriers should be conducted according to the acceptable ICER, i.e., a combination of mammography and MRI for BRCA1 mutation carriers and mammography alone for BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020205471.

No Association of Early-Onset Breast or Ovarian Cancer with Early-Onset Cancer in Relatives in BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation Families

According to clinical guidelines, the occurrence of very early-onset breast cancer (VEO-BC) (diagnosed ≤ age 30 years) or VEO ovarian cancer (VEO-OC) (diagnosed ≤ age 40 years) in families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation (BRCAm) prompts advancing the age of risk-reducing strategies in relatives. This study aimed to assess the relation between the occurrence of VEO-BC or VEO-OC in families with BRCAm and age at BC or OC diagnosis in relatives. We conducted a retrospective multicenter study of 448 consecutive families with BRCAm from 2003 to 2018. Mean age and 5-year–span distribution of age at BC or OC in relatives were compared in families with or without VEO-BC or VEO-OC. Conditional probability calculation and Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel chi-square tests were used to investigate early-onset cancer occurrence in relatives of VEO-BC and VEO-OC cases. Overall, 15% (19/245) of families with BRCA1m and 9% (19/203) with BRCA2m featured at least one case of VEO-BC; 8% (37/245) and 2% (2/203) featured at least one case of VEO-OC, respectively. The cumulative prevalence of VEO-BC was 5.1% (95% CI 3.6–6.6) and 2.5% (95% CI 1.4–3.6) for families with BRCA1m and BRCA2m, respectively. The distribution of age and mean age at BC diagnosis in relatives did not differ by occurrence of VEO-BC for families with BRCA1m or BRCA2m. Conditional probability calculations did not show an increase of early-onset BC in VEO-BC families with BRCA1m or BRCA2m. Conversely, the probability of VEO-BC was not increased in families with early-onset BC. VEO-BC or VEO-OC occurrence may not be related to young age at BC or OC onset in relatives in families with BRCAm. This finding—together with a relatively high VEO-BC risk for women with BRCAm—advocates for MRI breast screening from age 25 regardless of family history.

The Distinct Performances of Ultrasound, Mammograms, and MRI in Detecting Breast Cancer in Patients With Germline Pathogenic Variants in Cancer Predisposition Genes

A proportion of up to 10% of breast cancer resulted from hereditary germline pathogenic variants (GPVs) in cancer predisposition genes (CPGs), which been demonstrated distinct clinical features and imaging manifestations. However, the performance of imaging modalities for breast cancer surveillance in CPG mutation-carriers is still unclear, especially in Asian women. A population of 3002 breast cancer patients who received germline genetic testing of CPGs was enrolled from three hospitals in China. In total, 343 (11.6%) patients were found to harbor GPVs in CPGs, including 137 (4.6%) in BRCA1 and 135 (4.6%) in BRCA2. We compared the performances of ultrasound, mammograms, MRI, and the combining strategies in CPG mutation carriers and non-carriers. As a result, the ultrasound showed a higher detection rate compared with mammograms regardless of the mutation status. However, its detection rate was lower in CPG mutation carriers than in non-carriers (93.2% vs 98.0%, P=2.1×10-4), especially in the BRCA1 mutation carriers (90.9% vs 98.0%, P=2.0×10-4). MRI presented the highest sensitivity (98.5%) and the lowest underestimation rate (14.5%) in CPG mutation carriers among ultrasound, mammograms, and their combination. Supplemental ultrasound or mammograms would add no significant value to MRI for detecting breast cancer (P>0.05). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the family or personal cancer history could not replace the mutation status as the impact factor for the false-negative result and underestimation. In summary, clinicians and radiologists should be aware of the atypical imaging presentation of breast cancer in patients with GPVs in CPGs.

A systematic review of recommendations on screening strategies for breast cancer due to hereditary predisposition: Who, When, and How?

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is a global health problem that cannot be underestimated. Many studies have shown that breast cancer is related to pathogenic mutations in hereditary predisposition genes. Clinical practice guidelines play a vital role in guiding the selection of breast cancer screening. Little is known about the quality and consistency of guidelines' recommendations and their changes over these years.

METHODS

We reviewed the existing screening guidelines for genetic susceptibility to breast cancer and assessed the methodological quality, and summarized the recommendations to aid clinicians to make decisions. We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and guideline-specific databases, aiming to find the guidelines of breast cancer due to hereditary predisposition. The necessary information was exacted by Excel. We also summarized different evidence grading systems. The qualities of the guidelines were assessed by the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.

RESULTS

A total of 54 recommendations from 13 guidelines were extracted. Generally speaking, the recommendations were consistent, mainly focusing on mammography and MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommendations differ in details. Moreover, different guidelines are based on different grading systems, and some guidelines are not divided for age limits, which may limit the promotion and implementation of the guidelines. It is suggested that improvement can be made in this regard in the future.

Screening Algorithms in Dense Breasts: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality; however, when used to examine women with dense breasts, its performance and resulting benefits are reduced. Increased breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), ultrasound (US), molecular breast imaging (MBI), MRI, and contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) each have shown improved cancer detection in dense breasts when compared with 2D digital mammography (DM). DBT is the preferred mammographic technique for producing a simultaneous reduction in recalls (i.e., additional imaging). US further increases cancer detection after DM or DBT and reduces interval cancers (cancers detected in the interval between recommended screening examinations), but it also produces substantial additional false-positive findings. MBI improves cancer detection with an effective radiation dose that is approximately fourfold that of DM or DBT but is still within accepted limits. MRI provides the greatest increase in cancer detection and reduces interval cancers and late-stage disease; abbreviated techniques will reduce cost and improve availability. CEM appears to offer performance similar to that of MRI, but further validation is needed. Dense breast notification will soon be a national standard; therefore, understanding the performance of mammography and supplemental modalities is necessary to optimize screening for women with dense breasts.

[High-risk screening using magnetic resonance imaging]

BACKGROUND

Specialized breast cancer early detection programs with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in high-risk patients are by now well established in several countries. In Germany, such a program has been running as part of routine care since 2005.

OBJECTIVES

This review article will summarize current developments in high-risk screening with MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experiences with the high-risk screening program in Germany over now more than 10 years as well as a review of the current literature will form the basis for this article.

RESULTS

The MRI of the breast is by far the most sensitive imaging modality for the detection of breast cancer and represents the back bone of high-risk screening. More than 90% of cancers detected at high-risk screening are visible on the MRI and more than 30% of cancers are detected primarily by MRI alone. However, a prerequisite for effective screening with MRI is a sufficiently high breast cancer incidence in the screened population. This is demonstrated by the fact that the positive predictive value of screening with MRI in women without a BRCA1/2 mutation in the age group between 30 and 39 years is unacceptably low with 2.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

In high-risk screening, MRI is the primary imaging tool with mammography and/or ultrasound added as adjunct if necessary. In women with a strong family history of breast cancer but no proven pathogenic mutation in one of the known risk genes in the index patient in the family, the high-risk screening should not routinely start at age 30, but should be postponed until the 10-year breast cancer risk passes a threshold of 5%.

Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast, Ovarian, and Pancreatic focus primarily on assessment of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants associated with increased risk of breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer and recommended approaches to genetic testing/counseling and management strategies in individuals with these pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. This manuscript focuses on cancer risk and risk management for BRCA-related breast/ovarian cancer syndrome and Li-Fraumeni syndrome. Carriers of a BRCA1/2 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant have an excessive risk for both breast and ovarian cancer that warrants consideration of more intensive screening and preventive strategies. There is also evidence that risks of prostate cancer and pancreatic cancer are elevated in these carriers. Li-Fraumeni syndrome is a highly penetrant cancer syndrome associated with a high lifetime risk for cancer, including soft tissue sarcomas, osteosarcomas, premenopausal breast cancer, colon cancer, gastric cancer, adrenocortical carcinoma, and brain tumors.

Overview in Breast Cancer Screening in Lebanon

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women and men combined, and it is the second cause of cancer deaths in women after lung cancer. In Lebanon, the same epidemiological profile applies where BC is the leading cancer among Lebanese females, representing 38.2% of all cancer cases. As per the Center for Disease Control, there was a decline in BC mortality rate from 2003 to 2012 reflecting the adoption of national mammographic screening as the gold standard for BC detection by Western countries. The aim of this review study is to summarize current recommendations for BC screening and the available modalities for detecting BC in different countries, particularly in Lebanon. It also aims at exploring the impact of screening campaigns on BC early stage diagnosis in Lebanon. Despite the considerable debates whether screening mammograms provides more harm than benefits, screening awareness should be stressed since its benefits far outweigh its risks. In fact, the majority of BC mortality cases in Western countries are non-preventable by the use of screening mammograms alone. As such, Lebanon adopted a public focus on education and awareness campaigns encouraging early BC screening. Several studies showed the impact of early detection that is reflected by an increase in early stage disease and a decrease in more aggressive stages. Further studies should shed the light on the effect of awareness campaigns on early breast cancer diagnosis and clinical down staging at a national scope; therefore, having readily available data on pre- and post-adoption of screening campaigns is crucial for analyzing trends in mortality of breast cancer origin and reduction in advanced stages diseases. There is still room for future studies evaluating post-campaigns knowledge, attitudes, and practices of women having participated, emphasizing on the barriers refraining Lebanese women to contribute in BC screening campaigns.

Supplemental Screening for Patients at Intermediate and High Risk for Breast Cancer

The sensitivity of mammography is more limited in patients with dense breasts and some patients at higher risk for breast cancer. Patients with intermediate or high risk for breast cancer may begin screening earlier and benefit from supplemental screening techniques beyond standard 2-dimensional mammography. A patient's individual risk factors for developing breast cancer, their breast density, and the evidence supporting specific modalities for a given clinical scenario help to determine the need for supplemental screening and the modality chosen. Additional factors include the availability of supplemental screening techniques at an individual institution, cost, insurance coverage, and state-specific breast density legislation.

Breast cancer screening for women at high risk: review of current guidelines from leading specialty societies

The purpose of this article is to overview the existing breast cancer screening guidelines for women at high risk from world-leading specialty societies. Accumulation of evidence and development of accessible genetic testing strategies have changed the idea of breast cancer screening for high-risk women. Personalized tailor-made screening adjusted for risk factors has been conducted in accordance with guidelines. The use of imaging modalities other than mammography including contrast-enhanced MRI and other various strategies for improving screening are discussed. The present review also mentions the existing challenges in high-risk screening and the latest information based on two large-scale studies.

Performance Measures of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Plus Mammography in the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program

BACKGROUND

The Ontario Breast Screening Program expanded in July 2011 to screen high-risk women age 30-69 years with annual magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and digital mammography. This study examined the benefits of screening with mammography and MRI by age and risk criteria.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 8782 women age 30-69 years referred to the High Risk Ontario Breast Screening Program from July 2011 to June 2015, with final results to December 2016. Cancer detection rates, sensitivity, and specificity of MRI and mammography combined were compared with each modality individually within risk groups stratified by age using generalized estimating equation models. Prognostic features of screen-detected breast cancers were compared by modality using Fisher exact test. All P values are two-sided.

RESULTS

Among 20 053 screening episodes, there were 280 screen-detected breast cancers (cancer detection rate = 14.0 per 1000, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.4 to 15.7). The sensitivity of mammography was statistically significantly lower than that of MRI plus mammography (40.8%, 95% CI = 29.3% to 53.5% vs 96.0%, 95% CI = 92.2% to 98.0%, P < .001). In mutation carriers age 30-39 years, sensitivity of the combination was comparable with MRI alone (100.0% vs 96.8%, 95% CI = 79.2% to 100.0%, P = .99) but with statistically significantly decreased specificity (78.0%, 95% CI = 74.7% to 80.9% vs 86.2%, 95% CI = 83.5% to 88.5%, P < .001). In women age 50-69 years, combining MRI and mammography statistically significantly increased sensitivity compared with MRI alone (96.3%, 95% CI = 90.6% to 98.6% vs 90.9%, 95% CI = 83.6% to 95.1%, P = .02), with a small but statistically significant decrease in specificity (84.2%, 95% CI = 83.1% to 85.2% vs 90.0%, 95% CI = 89.2% to 90.9%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening high risk women age 30-39 years with annual MRI only may be sufficient for cancer detection and should be evaluated further, particularly for mutation carriers. Among women age 50-69 years, detection is most effective when mammography is included with annual MRI.

Evaluation of breast screening strategies in a high risk breast and ovarian cancer clinic

•

BRCA mutation carriers are more likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer compared to high-risk non-BRCA carriers.

•

MRI was able to effectively identify DCIS in the BRCA population.

•

In BRCA mutation carriers younger than 40, there were no MRI occult cancers found.

Recent data suggest that BRCA mutation carriers younger than 40 may not benefit from mammography in addition to MRI. Our objective was to evaluate screening modalities utilized in a high-risk population. Clinicopathologic data were abstracted for patients followed in a high risk clinic from 2007 to 2017. Descriptive statistics were calculated and associations between categorical variables were evaluated using chi-square tests. 631 women comprised the study population; 496 patients had no known mutation (79%), 128 (20%) had a BRCA mutation, and 7 patients had other deleterious mutations. BRCA mutation carriers were more likely to have cancers diagnosed after mammogram callbacks (p = 0.0046) and biopsies (p = 0.0026) compared to non-BRCA mutation carriers. BRCA mutation carriers were also more likely to have cancers diagnosed after biopsies following screening MRI (p = 0.045). 13 BRCA patients were diagnosed with cancer (average age 51). Of the cancers diagnosed after abnormal MRI, 3 were DCIS; all 3 patients had a normal mammogram 4–6 months prior. In those found after abnormal mammogram (n = 6), follow up MRI was performed in 4 cases; all demonstrated the lesion. Three patients were diagnosed younger than 40, 1 on mammogram and 2 on MRI. The patient diagnosed on mammogram had no prior MRI and the lesion was seen on follow-up MRI. Interval screening MRI identified DCIS in BRCA patients with a previous normal mammogram and cancers diagnosed on mammogram were all identified on follow-up MRI. These findings support further evaluation of MRI alone until age 40 in BRCA mutation carriers.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for risk-stratified screening in women with BRCA mutations or high familial risk for breast cancer: are we there yet?

PURPOSE

Women at an elevated lifetime risk for breast cancer (BC), including carriers of pathogenic mutations in BC predisposition genes, are recommended intensified BC screening that includes annual mammography (MG) and annual breast MRI. Controversy exists regarding the clinical utility of MRI as a screening tool in high-risk women. This paper is intended to review recent advances and remaining areas of uncertainty in order to further facilitate the incorporation of breast MRI into an intensified BC screening protocol for women at high familial risk and BRCA carriers.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team of medical oncologists and a radiologist specializing in the treatment of BC and high-risk patients searched PubMed to identify studies deemed to have the highest scientific value. Since none of the initial MRI studies were randomized, meta-analyses examining breast MRI screening in high-risk women were prioritized for inclusion.

RESULTS

Breast MRI performs well in high-risk women, including mutation carriers. Breast MRI screening allows for the detection of early stage, likely curable invasive BC. It is mandatory that radiologists receive appropriate MRI training to reduce false positives and unnecessary biopsies. MRI screening is cost-effective in the highest risk patients and new clinical trials are open examining abbreviated and ultra-fast MRI techniques as a tool to drive down costs and improve specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

As breast MRI is recommended as part of an intensified screening program in addition to mammography for high-risk women, it important that health care providers understand the benefits and limitations of this screening modality for high-risk women, as well as areas for further investigation.

Screening in patients with increased risk of breast cancer (part 2). Where are we now? Actual MRI screening controversies

For women with a high risk of breast cancer, early detection plays an important role. Due to the high incidence of breast cancer, and at a younger age than in the general population, screening begins earlier, and there is considerable evidence that magnetic resonance is the most sensitive diagnostic tool, and the principal American and European guidelines agree on the recommendation to perform annual magnetic resonance (with supplemental annual mammography) as an optimal mode of screening. In addition to the absence of current consensus on which patients should be included in the recommendation for magnetic resonance screening (widely discussed in the introduction of part 1 of this work), there are other aspects that are different between guidelines, that are not specified, or that are susceptible to change based on the evidence of several years of experience, that we have called «controversies», such as the age to begin screening, the possible advisability of using a different strategy in different subgroups, performing alternate versus synchronous magnetic resonance and mammography, the age at which to terminate the two techniques, or how to follow up after risk reduction surgery.The aim of the second part of the paper is, by reviewing the literature, to provide an update in relation to some of the main «controversies» in high risk screening with magnetic resonance. And finally, based on all this, to propose a possible model of optimal and updated screening protocol.

Solving the preoperative breast MRI conundrum: design and protocol of the MIPA study

Despite its high diagnostic performance, the use of breast MRI in the preoperative setting is controversial. It has the potential for personalized surgical management in breast cancer patients, but two of three randomized controlled trials did not show results in favor of its introduction for assessing the disease extent before surgery. Meta-analyses showed a higher mastectomy rate in women undergoing preoperative MRI compared to those who do not. Nevertheless, preoperative breast MRI is increasingly used and a survey from the American Society of Breast Surgeons showed that 41% of respondents ask for it in daily practice. In this context, a large-scale observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA study) was proposed under the guidance of the European Network for the Assessment of Imaging in Medicine (EuroAIM). The aims were (1) to prospectively and systematically collect data on consecutive women with a newly diagnosed breast cancer, not candidates for neoadjuvant therapy, who are offered or not offered breast MRI before surgery according to local practice; (2) to compare these two groups in terms of surgical and clinical endpoints, adjusting for covariates. The underlying hypotheses are that MRI does not cause additional mastectomies compared to conventional imaging, while reducing the reoperation rate in all or in subgroups of patients. Ninety-six centers applied to a web-based call; 36 were initially selected based on volume and quality standards; 27 were active for enrollment. On November 2018, the target of 7000 enrolled patients was reached. The MIPA study is presently at the analytic phase. Key Points • Breast MRI has a high diagnostic performance but its utility in the preoperative setting is controversial. • A large-scale observational multicenter prospective study was launched to compare women receiving with those not receiving preoperative MRI. • Twenty-seven centers enrolled more than 7000 patients. The study is presently at the analytic phase.

The supplemental value of mammographic screening over breast MRI alone in BRCA2 mutation carriers

Purpose

BRCA2 mutation carriers are offered annual breast screening with MRI and mammography. The aim of this study was to investigate the supplemental value of mammographic screening over MRI screening alone.

Methods

In this multicenter study, proven BRCA2 mutation carriers, who developed breast cancer during screening using both digital mammography and state-of-art breast MRI, were identified. Clinical data were reviewed to classify cases in screen-detected and interval cancers. Imaging was reviewed to assess the diagnostic value of mammography and MRI, using the Breast Imaging and Data System (BI-RADS) classification allocated at the time of diagnosis.

Results

From January 2003 till March 2019, 62 invasive breast cancers and 23 ductal carcinomas in situ were diagnosed in 83 BRCA2 mutation carriers under surveillance. Overall screening sensitivity was 95.2% (81/85). Four interval cancers occurred (4.7% (4/85)). MRI detected 73 of 85 breast cancers (sensitivity 85.8%) and 42 mammography (sensitivity 49.9%) (p < 0.001).

Eight mammography-only lesions occurred. In 1 of 17 women younger than 40 years, a 6-mm grade 3 DCIS, retrospectively visible on MRI, was detected with mammography only in a 38-year-old woman. The other 7 mammography-only breast cancers were diagnosed in women aged 50 years and older, increasing sensitivity in this subgroup from 79.5% (35/44) to 95.5% (42/44) (p ≤ 0.001).

Conclusions

In BRCA2 mutation carriers younger than 40 years, the benefit of mammographic screening over MRI was very small. In carriers of 50 years and older, mammographic screening contributed significantly. Hence, we propose to postpone mammographic screening in BRCA2 mutation carriers to at least age 40.

Recommendations for Advancing the Diagnosis and Management of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer in Brazil

PURPOSE

The objective of this review was to address the barriers limiting access to genetic cancer risk assessment and genetic testing for individuals with suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) through a review of the diagnosis and management steps of HBOC.

METHODS

A selected panel of Brazilian experts in fields related to HBOC was provided with a series of relevant questions to address before the multiday conference. During this conference, each narrative was discussed and edited by the entire group, through numerous drafts and rounds of discussion, until a consensus was achieved.

RESULTS

The authors propose specific and realistic recommendations for improving access to early diagnosis, risk management, and cancer care of HBOC specific to Brazil. Moreover, in creating these recommendations, the authors strived to address all the barriers and impediments mentioned in this article.

CONCLUSION

There is a great need to expand hereditary cancer testing and counseling in Brazil, and changing current policies is essential to accomplishing this goal. Increased knowledge and awareness, together with regulatory actions to increase access to this technology, have the potential to improve patient care and prevention and treatment efforts for patients with cancer across the country.

The Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis, 2018 Edition

This article updates readers as to what is new in the Japanese Breast Cancer Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis, 2018 Edition. Breast cancer screening issues are covered, including matters of breast density and possible supplemental modalities, along with appropriate pre-operative/follow-up diagnostic breast imaging tests. Up-to-date clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer screening and diagnosis should help to provide patients and clinicians with not only evidence-based breast imaging options, but also accurate and balanced information about the benefits and harms of intervention, which ultimately enables shared decision making about imaging test plans.

Evaluation of single-view contrast-enhanced mammography as novel reading strategy: a non-inferiority feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend screening of high-risk women using breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) has matured, providing excellent diagnostic accuracy. To lower total radiation dose, evaluation of single-view (1 V) CEM exams might be considered instead of double-view (2 V) readings as an alternative reading strategy in women who cannot undergo MRI.

METHODS

This retrospective non-inferiority feasibility study evaluates whether the use of 1 V results in an acceptable sensitivity for detecting breast cancer (non-inferiority margin, - 10%). CEM images from May 2013 to December 2017 were included. 1 V readings were performed by consensus opinion of three radiologists, followed by 2 V readings being performed after 6 weeks. Cases were considered "malignant" if the final BI-RADS score was ≥ 4, enabling calculation of sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Histopathological results or follow-up served as a gold standard.

RESULTS

A total of 368 cases were evaluated. Mean follow-up for benign or negative cases was 20.9 months. Sensitivity decreased by 9.6% from 92.9 to 83.3% when only 1 V was used for evaluation (p < 0.001). The lower limit of the 90% confidence interval around the difference in sensitivity between 1 V and 2 V readings was - 15% and lies below the predefined non-inferiority margin of - 10%. Hence, non-inferiority of 1 V to 2 V reading cannot be concluded. AUC for 1 V was significantly lower, 0.861 versus 0.899 for 2 V (p = 0.0174).

CONCLUSION

Non-inferiority of 1 V evaluations as an alternative reading strategy to standard 2 V evaluations could not be concluded. 1 V evaluations had lower diagnostic performance compared with 2 V evaluations.

KEY POINTS

• To lower radiation exposure used in contrast-enhanced mammography, we studied a hypothetical alternative strategy: single-view readings (1 V) versus (standard) double-view readings (2 V). • Based on our predefined margin of - 10%, non-inferiority of 1 V could not be concluded. • 1 V evaluation is not recommended as an alternative reading strategy to lower CEM-related radiation exposure.

Assessment of breast self- examination practice and associated factors among female workers in Debre Tabor Town public health facilities, North West Ethiopia, 2018: Cross- sectional study

BACKGROUND

Although breast Self-Examination is no longer tenable as a standard method to detect early breast cancer, world health organization recommends breast self -examination for raising awareness of women about breast cancer. Secondary prevention through monthly breast self-examination is the best option to tackle the rising incidence of breast cancer. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess breast self -examination practice and associated factors.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted from April 23 to May 23, 2018. A total of 421 female workers in Debre Tabor Town public health facilities were included. The study participants were selected using simple random sampling technique from the study population. The collected data were checked for completeness. The data were entered and cleaned using EpiData version 3.1 then exported to SPSS version 20 for analysis. Crude odd ratio and probability value were identified for each independent variable and all independent variables with probability value of less than 0.2 were entered into multivariables logistic regression. Statistically significant associated factors were identified based on probability value (p-value) less than 0.05 and adjusted odd ratio with 95% confidence interval.

RESULT

The mean age of participants was 25.2 (S.D = 4.12) and 137 (32.5%) of the participants had practiced breast self -examination and 64 (15.2%) of them performed it monthly. Family history of breast cancer (adjusted OR = 6.5, CI = 1.54-21.4), Knowledge about breast -self examination (adjusted OR = 5.74, CI = 2.3-14.4) and self- efficacy in practicing breast self -examination (adjusted OR = 4.7, CI = 1.84-12.11) were significantly associated with breast self -examination practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed that the prevalence of breast self-examination was low. Family history of breast cancer, knowledge about breast self -examination and self- efficacy in practicing breast self- examination did have statistically significant association with breast self-examination practice.

Why the Gold Standard Approach by Mammography Demands Extension by Multiomics? Application of Liquid Biopsy miRNA Profiles to Breast Cancer Disease Management

In the global context, the epidemic of breast cancer (BC) is evident for the early 21st century. Evidence shows that national mammography screening programs have sufficiently reduced BC related mortality. Therefore, the great utility of the mammography-based screening is not an issue. However, both false positive and false negative BC diagnosis, excessive biopsies, and irradiation linked to mammography application, as well as sub-optimal mammography-based screening, such as in the case of high-dense breast tissue in young females, altogether increase awareness among the experts regarding the limitations of mammography-based screening. Severe concerns regarding the mammography as the “golden standard” approach demanding complementary tools to cover the evident deficits led the authors to present innovative strategies, which would sufficiently improve the quality of the BC management and services to the patient. Contextually, this article provides insights into mammography deficits and current clinical data demonstrating the great potential of non-invasive diagnostic tools utilizing circulating miRNA profiles as an adjunct to conventional mammography for the population screening and personalization of BC management.

Multireader Study on the Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrafast Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Breast Cancer Screening

OBJECTIVES

Breast cancer screening using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has limited accessibility due to high costs of breast MRI. Ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI can be acquired within 2 minutes. We aimed to assess whether screening performance of breast radiologist using an ultrafast breast MRI-only screening protocol is as good as performance using a full multiparametric diagnostic MRI protocol (FDP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The institutional review board approved this study, and waived the need for informed consent. Between January 2012 and June 2014, 1791 consecutive breast cancer screening examinations from 954 women with a lifetime risk of more than 20% were prospectively collected. All women were scanned using a 3 T protocol interleaving ultrafast breast MRI acquisitions in a full multiparametric diagnostic MRI protocol consisting of standard dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences, diffusion-weighted imaging, and T2-weighted imaging. Subsequently, a case set was created including all biopsied screen-detected lesions in this period (31 malignant and 54 benign) and 116 randomly selected normal cases with more than 2 years of follow-up. Prior examinations were included when available. Seven dedicated breast radiologists read all 201 examinations and 153 available priors once using the FDP and once using ultrafast breast MRI only in 2 counterbalanced and crossed-over reading sessions.

RESULTS

For reading the FDP versus ultrafast breast MRI alone, sensitivity was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.90) versus 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.88) (P = 0.50), specificity was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.74-0.79) versus 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.84) (P = 0.002), positive predictive value was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.36-0.45) versus 0.45 (95% CI, 0.41-0.50) (P = 0.14), and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82-0.96) versus 0.89 (95% CI, 0.82-0.96) (P = 0.83). Ultrafast breast MRI reading was 22.8% faster than reading FDP (P < 0.001). Interreader agreement is significantly better for ultrafast breast MRI (κ = 0.730; 95% CI, 0.699-0.761) than for the FDP (κ = 0.665; 95% CI, 0.633-0.696).

CONCLUSIONS

Breast MRI screening using only an ultrafast breast MRI protocol is noninferior to screening with an FDP and may result in significantly higher screening specificity and shorter reading time.

BRCA Mutation Carriers: Breast and Ovarian Cancer Screening Guidelines and Imaging Considerations

Patients who carry the BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations have an underlying genetic predisposition for breast and ovarian cancers. These deleterious genetic mutations are the most common genes implicated in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers. This monograph summarizes the evidence behind current screening recommendations, reviews imaging protocols specific to this patient population, and illustrates some of the imaging nuances of breast and ovarian cancers in this clinical setting.

Intensive Surveillance with Biannual Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Downstages Breast Cancer in BRCA1 Mutation Carriers

PURPOSE

To establish a cohort of high-risk women undergoing intensive surveillance for breast cancer.Experimental Design: We performed dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI every 6 months in conjunction with annual mammography (MG). Eligible participants had a cumulative lifetime breast cancer risk ≥20% and/or tested positive for a pathogenic mutation in a known breast cancer susceptibility gene.

RESULTS

Between 2004 and 2016, we prospectively enrolled 295 women, including 157 mutation carriers (75 BRCA1, 61 BRCA2); participants' mean age at entry was 43.3 years. Seventeen cancers were later diagnosed: 4 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 13 early-stage invasive breast cancers. Fifteen cancers occurred in mutation carriers (11 BRCA1, 3 BRCA2, 1 CDH1). Median size of the invasive cancers was 0.61 cm. No patients had lymph node metastasis at time of diagnosis, and no interval invasive cancers occurred. The sensitivity of biannual MRI alone was 88.2% and annual MG plus biannual MRI was 94.1%. The cancer detection rate of biannual MRI alone was 0.7% per 100 screening episodes, which is similar to the cancer detection rate of 0.7% per 100 screening episodes for annual MG plus biannual MRI. The number of recalls and biopsies needed to detect one cancer by biannual MRI were 2.8 and 1.7 in BRCA1 carriers, 12.0 and 8.0 in BRCA2 carriers, and 11.7 and 5.0 in non-BRCA1/2 carriers, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Biannual MRI performed well for early detection of invasive breast cancer in genomically stratified high-risk women. No benefit was associated with annual MG screening plus biannual MRI screening.See related commentary by Kuhl and Schrading, p. 1693.