1
|
Washington I, Palm RF, White J, Rosenberg SA, Ataya D. The Role of MRI in Breast Cancer and Breast Conservation Therapy. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2122. [PMID: 38893241 PMCID: PMC11171236 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16112122] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2024] [Revised: 05/19/2024] [Accepted: 05/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Contrast-enhanced breast MRI has an established role in aiding in the detection, evaluation, and management of breast cancer. This article discusses MRI sequences, the clinical utility of MRI, and how MRI has been evaluated for use in breast radiotherapy treatment planning. We highlight the contribution of MRI in the decision-making regarding selecting appropriate candidates for breast conservation therapy and review the emerging role of MRI-guided breast radiotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iman Washington
- Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 USF Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA;
| | - Russell F. Palm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 USF Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA;
| | - Julia White
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Kansas Medical Center, 4001 Rainbow Blvd, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA;
| | - Stephen A. Rosenberg
- Department of Radiation Therapy, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 USF Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA;
| | - Dana Ataya
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Interventional Radiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 10920 N. McKinley Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bissell MB, Keshavarsi S, Fleming R, Au F, Kulkarni S, Ghai S, Freitas V. MRI-visualized T2 hyperintense breast lesions: identifying clinical and imaging factors linked to malignant biopsy outcomes. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2024; 205:159-168. [PMID: 38305940 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-023-07239-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2023] [Accepted: 12/20/2023] [Indexed: 02/03/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine the malignancy rate for MRI-guided breast biopsies performed for T2 hyperintense breast lesions and to assess additional clinical and MRI characteristics that can predict benign and malignant outcomes. METHODS A retrospective chart review of consecutive MRI-guided breast biopsies performed in two tertiary hospitals was conducted over two years. Biopsies performed for T2 hyperintense lesions were selected, and further lesion imaging characteristics and patient risk factors were collected. Univariate and multivariate modeling regression were used to determine additional imaging and patient factors associated with malignant outcomes for biopsies of T2 hyperintense lesions. RESULTS Out of 369 MRI-guided breast biopsies, 100 (27%) were performed for T2 hyperintense lesions. Two biopsy-proven benign lesions were excluded as the patient was lost on follow-up. With a study cohort of 98 lesions, the final pathology results were benign for 80 (80%) of these lesions, while 18 (18%) were malignant. Using multivariate logistic modeling, patient age > 50 (OR 5.99 (1.49, 24.08 95% CI), p < 0.05) and lesion size > 3 cm (OR 5.54 (1.54-18.7), p < 0.01) were found to be important predictors of malignant outcomes for MRI biopsies performed for T2 hyperintense lesions. CONCLUSION Our study observed a high malignancy rate, challenging the assumption that T2 hyperintensity can be considered a benign imaging characteristic for otherwise suspicious MRI-detected lesions. Decision-making regarding tissue sampling should be made based on a thorough evaluation of more reliable additional demographic and imaging factors, including patient age and lesion size.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary Beth Bissell
- Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Medical Physics, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Rd, Ottawa, ON, K1S 2H6, Canada
| | - Sareh Keshavarsi
- Department of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Rachel Fleming
- Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Frederick Au
- Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Supriya Kulkarni
- Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Sandeep Ghai
- Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Vivianne Freitas
- Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, 610 University Ave, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Harvey JA. The Future Is in the Details, and a Farewell. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2023; 5:237-239. [PMID: 38416895 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbad021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2023] [Indexed: 03/01/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer A Harvey
- University of Rochester, Department of Imaging Sciences, Rochester, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Grimm LJ, Conant EF, Dialani VM, Dontchos BN, Harvey JA, Kacharia VS, Plecha DM, Mango VL. Abbreviated Breast MRI Utilization: A Survey of the Society of Breast Imaging. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2022; 4:506-512. [PMID: 38416950 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbac048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2022] [Indexed: 03/01/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To survey Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) membership on their use of abbreviated breast MRI to understand variability in practice patterns. METHODS A survey was developed by the SBI Patient Care and Delivery committee for distribution to SBI membership in July and August 2021. Eighteen questions queried practice demographics and then abbreviated breast MRI practices regarding initial adoption, scheduling and finances, MRI protocols, and interpretations. Comparisons between responses were made by practice demographics. RESULTS There were 321 respondents (response rate: 15.3%), of whom 25% (81/321) currently offer and 26% (84/321) plan to offer abbreviated breast MRI. Practices in the South (37/107, 35%) and Midwest (22/70, 31%) were more likely to offer abbreviated MRI (P = 0.005). Practices adopted many strategies to raise awareness, most directed at referring providers. The mean charge to patients was $414, and only 6% of practices offer financial support. The median time slot for studies is 20 minutes, with only 15% of practices using block scheduling of consecutive breast MRIs. Regarding MRI protocols, 64% (37/58) of respondents included only a single first-pass post-contrast sequence, and 90% (52/58) included T2-weighted sequences. Patient eligibility was highly varied, and a majority of respondents (37/58, 64%) do not provide any recommendations for screening intervals in non-high-risk women. CONCLUSION Abbreviated breast MRI utilization is growing rapidly, and practices are applying a variety of strategies to facilitate adoption. Although there is notable variability in patient eligibility, follow-up intervals, and costs, there is some agreement regarding abbreviated breast MRI protocols.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lars J Grimm
- Duke University Medical Center, Department of Radiology, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Emily F Conant
- University of Pennsylvania, Department of Radiology, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Vandana M Dialani
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Department of Radiology, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Brian N Dontchos
- Massachusetts General Hospital, Department of Radiology, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jennifer A Harvey
- University of Rochester Medical Center, Department of Imaging Sciences, Rochester, NY, USA
| | | | - Donna M Plecha
- Case Western Reserve University, Department of Radiology, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Nguyen DL, Myers KS, Oluyemi E, Mullen LA, Panigrahi B, Rossi J, Ambinder EB. BI-RADS 3 Assessment on MRI: A Lesion-Based Review for Breast Radiologists. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2022; 4:460-473. [PMID: 36247094 PMCID: PMC9549780 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbac032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2022] [Indexed: 09/15/2024]
Abstract
Unlike mammography and US, limited data exist to establish well-defined criteria for MRI findings that have a ≤2% likelihood of malignancy. Therefore, determining which findings are appropriate for a BI-RADS 3 assessment on MRI remains challenging and variable among breast radiologists. Emerging data suggest that BI-RADS 3 should be limited to baseline MRI examinations (or examinations with less than two years of prior comparisons) performed for high-risk screening and only used for masses with all of the typical morphological and kinetic features suggestive of a fibroadenoma or dominant enhancing T2 hypointense foci that is distinct from background parenchymal enhancement and without suspicious kinetics. This article presents an updated discussion of BI-RADS 3 assessment (probably benign) for breast MRI using current evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Derek L Nguyen
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Kelly S Myers
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Eniola Oluyemi
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Lisa A Mullen
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Babita Panigrahi
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Joanna Rossi
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Emily B Ambinder
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Implementation of Abbreviated Breast MRI for Screening: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2021; 218:202-212. [PMID: 34378397 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.21.26349] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) is being rapidly adopted to harness the high sensitivity of screening MRI while addressing issues related to access, cost, and workflow. The successful implementation of an ABI-MRI program requires collaboration across administrative, operational, financial, technical, and clinical providers. Institutions must be thoughtful in defining AB-MRI patient eligibility and providing recommendations for screening intervals, as existing practices are heterogeneous. Similarly, there is no universally accepted AB-MRI protocol, though guiding principles should harmonize abbreviated and full protocols while being mindful of scan duration and table time. The interpretation of AB-MRI will be a new experience for many radiologists and may require a phased rollout as well as a careful audit of performance metrics over time to ensure benchmark metrics are achieved. AB-MRI finances, which are driven by patient self-payment, will require buy-in from hospital administration with the recognition that downstream revenues will be needed to support initial costs. Finally, successful startup of an AB-MRI program requires active engagement with the larger community of patients and referring providers. As AB-MRI becomes more widely accepted and available, best practices and community standards will continue to evolve to ensure high quality patient care.
Collapse
|
7
|
Ong A, Azizi A, Ambinder EB, Oluyemi ET, Harvey SC, Hung J. Image-guided Procedure Versus 2-year Follow-up for a BI-RADS 3 Probably Benign Lesion: A Cost Comparison Analysis. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2021; 3:57-63. [PMID: 38424837 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbaa087] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2020] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Perform a comparison between the costs of image-guided breast procedures versus 2-year imaging follow-up for findings classified as BI-RADS assessment category 3-probably benign. METHODS The national payment amount costs at non-facility locations were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services physician fee schedule for breast imaging-related Current Procedural Terminology codes. Total costs were calculated and compared for management algorithms of 2-year imaging follow-up of a BI-RADS 3 lesion from 2018 through 2019 versus performing an image-guided procedure of the lesion in 2018 after the initial diagnostic imaging. RESULTS Two-year mammographic follow-up of a BI-RADS 3 finding costs $484. This was less than a stereotactic-guided breast biopsy, which cost at least $1055. Two-year follow-up for a probably benign US finding cost $615 compared to $1173 for the least expensive US-guided breast biopsy scenario. For breast MRI, 2-year imaging follow-up cost $1510, which was also less than most MRI-guided breast biopsy scenarios. The one exception in which biopsy costs less than 2-year imaging follow-up was in the setting of an MRI-guided biopsy in the average-risk population without a post-benign biopsy follow-up breast MRI; in this setting, MRI biopsy cost $1235. CONCLUSION In 2018-2019, 2-year imaging follow-up of a BI-RADS 3 finding continues to be less costly than an immediate procedure, except for MRI-guided breast biopsy in the average-risk population without a post-benign biopsy follow-up MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Ong
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD
| | - Armina Azizi
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD
| | - Emily B Ambinder
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD
| | - Eniola T Oluyemi
- Johns Hopkins Medicine, The Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Baltimore, MD
| | - Susan C Harvey
- Hologic, Inc., Department of Breast and Skeletal Health, Danbury, CT
| | - Jessica Hung
- Christiana Care Health System, Department of Radiology, Newark, DE
| |
Collapse
|