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.

Background Parenchymal Enhancement: A Comprehensive Update

Breast MR imaging is a complementary screening tool for patients at high risk for breast cancer and has been used in the diagnostic setting. Normal enhancement of breast tissue on MR imaging is called breast parenchymal enhancement (BPE), which occurs after administration of an intravenous contrast agent. BPE varies widely due to menopausal status, use of exogenous hormones, and breast cancer treatment. Degree of BPE has also been shown to influence breast cancer risk and may predict treatment outcomes. The authors provide a comprehensive update on BPE with review of the recent literature.

Impact of Imaging Biomarkers and AI on Breast Cancer Management: A Brief Review

Breast cancer stands out as the most frequently identified malignancy, ranking as the fifth leading cause of global cancer-related deaths. The American College of Radiology (ACR) introduced the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) as a standard terminology facilitating communication between radiologists and clinicians; however, an update is now imperative to encompass the latest imaging modalities developed subsequent to the 5th edition of BI-RADS. Within this review article, we provide a concise history of BI-RADS, delve into advanced mammography techniques, ultrasonography (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), PET/CT images, and microwave breast imaging, and subsequently furnish comprehensive, updated insights into Molecular Breast Imaging (MBI), diagnostic imaging biomarkers, and the assessment of treatment responses. This endeavor aims to enhance radiologists' proficiency in catering to the personalized needs of breast cancer patients. Lastly, we explore the augmented benefits of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and deep learning (DL) applications in segmenting, detecting, and diagnosing breast cancer, as well as the early prediction of the response of tumors to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). By assimilating state-of-the-art computer algorithms capable of deciphering intricate imaging data and aiding radiologists in rendering precise and effective diagnoses, AI has profoundly revolutionized the landscape of breast cancer radiology. Its vast potential holds the promise of bolstering radiologists' capabilities and ameliorating patient outcomes in the realm of breast cancer management.

High-Temporal/High-Spatial Resolution Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Improves Diagnostic Accuracy Compared With Standard Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With High Background Parenchymal Enhancement

PURPOSE

To compare breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnostic performance using a standard high-spatial resolution protocol versus a simultaneous high-temporal/high-spatial resolution (HTHS) protocol in women with high levels of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of contrast-enhanced breast MRIs performed at our institution before and after the introduction of the HTHS protocol. We compared diagnostic performance of the HTHS and standard protocol by comparing cancer detection rate (CDR) and positive predictive value of biopsy (PPV3) among women with high BPE (ie, marked or moderate).

RESULTS

Among women with high BPE, the HTHS protocol demonstrated increased CDR (23.6 per 1,000 patients v 7.9 per 1,000 patients; P = 0. 013) and increased PPV3 (16.0% v 6.3%; P = .021) compared with the standard protocol. This corresponded to a 9.8% (95% CI, 1.29 to 18.3) decrease in the proportion of unnecessary biopsies among high-BPE patients and an additional cancer yield of 15.7 per 1,000 patients (95% CI, 1.3 to 18.3).

CONCLUSION

Among women with high BPE, HTHS MRI improved diagnostic performance, leading to an additional cancer yield of 15.7 cancers per 1,000 women and concomitantly decreasing unnecessary biopsies by 9.8%. A multisite prospective trial is warranted to confirm these findings and to pave the way for more widespread clinical implementation.

Evaluation of Association Between Menstrual Cycle Timing and Quantitative Background Parenchymal Enhancement on Breast MRI in Premenopausal Women

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the influence of menstrual cycle timing on quantitative background parenchymal enhancement and to assess an optimal timing of breast MRI in premenopausal women.

METHODS

A total of 197 premenopausal women were enrolled, 120 of which were in the malignant group and 77 in the benign group. Two radiologists depicted the regions of interest (ROI) of the three consecutive biggest slices of glandular tissue in the unaffected side and calculated the ratio (=[SIpost - SIpre]/SIpre) in ROI from the precontrast and early phase to assess BPE quantitatively. Association of BPE with menstrual cycle timing was compared in three categories. The relationships between BPE and age /body mass index (BMI) were also explored.

RESULTS

We found that the BPE ratio presented lower in patients with the follicular phase (day1-14) compared to the luteal phase (day15-30) in the benign group (P = .036). Also, the BPE ratio presented significantly lower in the proliferative phase (day5-14) than the menstrual phase (day1-4) and the secretory phase(day15-30) in the benign group (P = .006). While the BPE ratio was not significantly different among the respective weeks (1-4) of the menstrual cycle in the benign group (P > .05). In the malignant group, the BPE ratio did not significantly differ between/among any menstrual cycle phase or week (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

It seems more suitable for Asian women whose lesions need to follow up or are suspected of malignant to undergo breast MRI within the 1st to 14th day of the menstrual cycle, especially on the 5th to 14th day.

MRI background parenchymal enhancement, breast density and breast cancer risk factors: A cross-sectional study in pre- and post-menopausal women

Breast tissue enhances on contrast MRI and is called background parenchymal enhancement (BPE). Having high BPE has been associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. We examined the relationship between BPE and the amount of fibroglandular tissue on MRI (MRI-FGT) and breast cancer risk factors. This was a cross-sectional study of 415 women without breast cancer undergoing contrast-enhanced breast MRI at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. All women completed a questionnaire assessing exposures at the time of MRI. Prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) describing the relationship between breast cancer risk factors and BPE and MRI-FGT were generated using modified Poisson regression. In multivariable-adjusted models a positive association between body mass index (BMI) and BPE was observed, with a 5-unit increase in BMI associated with a 14% and 44% increase in prevalence of high BPE in pre- and post-menopausal women, respectively. Conversely, a strong inverse relationship between BMI and MRI-FGT was observed in both pre- (PR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.57, 0.76) and post-menopausal (PR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.56, 0.78) women. Use of preventive medication (e.g., tamoxifen) was associated with having low BPE, while no association was observed for MRI-FGT. BPE is an imaging marker available from standard contrast-enhanced MRI, that is influenced by endogenous and exogenous hormonal exposures in both pre- and post-menopausal women.

BI-RADS 3 Assessment on MRI: A Lesion-Based Review for Breast Radiologists

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.

MRI Evaluation of the Lactating Breast

Purpose of Review

To review the MRI appearance of physiologic lactational changes, common benign pathologies, and malignancies in the lactating breast.

Recent Findings

The prevalence of pregnancy-associated breast cancer has increased as more women delay childbirth and lactation. There is a transient increase in breast cancer risk after delivery when women may be lactating. MRI is more sensitive than mammography and ultrasound for the evaluation of the extent of disease in lactating women.

Summary

Understanding the key MRI findings of benign and malignant pathologies in the lactating breast is critical for accurate diagnosis and prompt evaluation of pregnancy-associated breast cancer.

Advances and Future Directions in Molecular Breast Imaging

Molecular breast imaging (MBI) using 99mTc-sestamibi has advanced rapidly over the past decade. Technical advances allow lower-dose, higher-resolution imaging and biopsy capability. MBI can be used for supplemental breast cancer screening with mammography for women with dense breasts, as well as to assess neoadjuvant therapy response, evaluate disease extent, and predict breast cancer risk. This article highlights the current state of the art and future directions in MBI.

Background parenchymal enhancement in contrast-enhanced MR imaging suggests systemic effects of intrauterine contraceptive devices

OBJECTIVES

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive devices (LNG-IUDs) are designed to exhibit only local hormonal effects. There is an ongoing debate on whether LNG-IUDs can have side effects similar to systemic hormonal medication. Benign background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) in dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI has been established as a sensitive marker of hormonal stimulation of the breast. We investigated the association between LNG-IUD use and BPE in breast MRI to further explore possible systemic effects of LNG-IUDs.

METHODS

Our hospital database was searched to identify premenopausal women without personal history of breast cancer, oophorectomy, and hormone replacement or antihormone therapy, who had undergone standardized DCE breast MRI at least twice, once with and without an LNG-IUD in place. To avoid confounding aging-related effects on BPE, half of included women had their first MRI without, the other half with, LNG-IUD in place. Degree of BPE was analyzed according to the ACR categories. Wilcoxon-matched-pairs signed-rank test was used to compare the distribution of ACR categories with vs. without LNG-IUD.

RESULTS

Forty-eight women (mean age, 46 years) were included. In 24/48 women (50% [95% CI: 35.9-64.1%]), ACR categories did not change with vs. without LNG-IUDs. In 23/48 women (48% [33.9-62.1%]), the ACR category was higher with vs. without LNG-IUDs; in 1/48 (2% [0-6%]), the ACR category was lower with vs. without LNG-IUDs. The change of ACR category depending on the presence or absence of an LNG-IUD proved highly significant (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The use of an LNG-IUD can be associated with increased BPE in breast MRI, providing further evidence that LNG-IUDs do have systemic effects.

KEY POINTS

• The use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive devices is associated with increased background parenchymal enhancement in breast MRI. • This suggests that hormonal effects of these devices are not only confined to the uterine cavity, but may be systemic. • Potential systemic effects of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraceptive devices should therefore be considered.

Background Parenchymal Enhancement on Breast MRI: Assessment and Clinical Implications

Purpose of Review

To present recent literature regarding the assessment and clinical implications of background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI.

Recent Findings

The qualitative assessment of BPE remains variable within the literature, as well as in clinical practice. Several different quantitative approaches have been investigated in recent years, most commonly region of interest-based and segmentation-based assessments. However, quantitative assessment has not become standard in clinical practice to date. Numerous studies have demonstrated a clear association between higher BPE and future breast cancer risk. While higher BPE does not appear to significantly impact cancer detection, it may result in a higher abnormal interpretation rate. BPE is also likely a marker of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with decreases in BPE during and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy correlated with pCR. In contrast, pre-treatment BPE does not appear to be predictive of pCR. The association between BPE and prognosis is less clear, with heterogeneous results in the literature.

Summary

Assessment of BPE continues to evolve, with heterogeneity in approaches to both qualitative and quantitative assessment. The level of BPE has important clinical implications, with associations with future breast cancer risk and treatment response. BPE may also be an imaging marker of prognosis, but future research is needed on this topic.

Screening Breast MRI and the Science of Premenopausal Background Parenchymal Enhancement

The significance of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on screening and diagnostic breast MRI continues to be elucidated. Background parenchymal enhancement was initially deemed probably benign and followed or thought of as an artifact degrading the accuracy of breast cancer detection on breast MRI examinations. Subsequent research has focused on understanding the role of BPE regarding screening breast MRI. Today, there is growing evidence that a myriad of factors affect BPE, which in turn may influence patient outcomes. Additionally, BPE could represent an important risk factor for the future development of breast cancer. This article aims to describe the most up-to-date research on BPE as it relates to screening breast MRI in premenopausal women.

Current Status and Future of BI-RADS in Multimodality Imaging, From the AJR Special Series on Radiology Reporting and Data Systems

BI-RADS is a communication and data tracking system that has evolved since its inception as a brief mammography lexicon and reporting guide into a robust structured reporting platform and comprehensive quality assurance tool for mammography, ultrasound, and MRI. Consistent and appropriate use of the BI-RADS lexicon terminology and assessment categories effectively communicates findings, estimates the risk of malignancy, and provides management recommendations to patients and referring clinicians. The impact of BI-RADS currently extends internationally through six language translations. A condensed version has been proposed to facilitate a phased implementation of BI-RADS in resource-constrained regions. The primary advance of the 5th edition of BI-RADS is harmonization of the lexicon terms across mammography, ultrasound, and MRI. Harmonization has also been achieved across these modalities for the reporting structure, assessment categories, management recommendations, and data tracking system. Areas for improvement relate to certain common findings that lack lexicon descriptors and a need for further clarification of proper use of category 3. BI-RADS is anticipated to continue to evolve for application to a range of emerging breast imaging modalities.

Association of breast cancer with MRI background parenchymal enhancement: the IMAGINE case-control study

Background

Background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be associated with breast cancer risk, but previous studies of the association are equivocal and limited by incomplete blinding of BPE assessment. In this study, we evaluated the association between BPE and breast cancer based on fully blinded assessments of BPE in the unaffected breast.

Methods

The Imaging and Epidemiology (IMAGINE) study is a multicenter breast cancer case-control study of women receiving diagnostic, screening, or follow-up breast MRI, recruited from three comprehensive cancer centers in the USA. Cases had a first diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer and controls had no history of or current breast cancer. A single board-certified breast radiologist with 12 years’ experience, blinded to case-control status and clinical information, assessed the unaffected breast for BPE without view of the affected breast of cases (or the corresponding breast laterality of controls). The association between BPE and breast cancer was estimated by multivariable logistic regression separately for premenopausal and postmenopausal women.

Results

The analytic dataset included 835 cases and 963 controls. Adjusting for fibroglandular tissue (breast density), age, race/ethnicity, BMI, parity, family history of breast cancer, BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations, and other confounders, moderate/marked BPE (vs minimal/mild BPE) was associated with breast cancer among premenopausal women [odds ratio (OR) 1.49, 95% CI 1.05–2.11; p = 0.02]. Among postmenopausal women, mild/moderate/marked vs minimal BPE had a similar, but statistically non-significant, association with breast cancer (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.92–2.27; p = 0.1).

Conclusions

BPE is associated with breast cancer in premenopausal women, and possibly postmenopausal women, after adjustment for breast density and confounders. Our results suggest that BPE should be evaluated alongside breast density for inclusion in models predicting breast cancer risk.