1
|
Galati F, Marra A, Cicciarelli F, Pasculli M, Maroncelli R, Rizzo V, Moffa G, Pediconi F. Cryoablation for the treatment of breast cancer: immunological implications and future perspectives. Utopia or reality? Radiol Med 2024; 129:222-228. [PMID: 38296892 PMCID: PMC10879305 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-024-01769-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2023] [Accepted: 01/03/2024] [Indexed: 02/02/2024]
Abstract
Cryoablation is a minimally invasive technique currently employed in breast cancer care, that uses freeze and thaw cycles to treat benign breast lesions, small breast cancers or focal sites of metastatic disease in patients not eligible for surgery. The final goal of this procedure is to destroy breast cancer cells using extreme cold. In addition, several studies have shown that this technique seems to have an enhancing effect on the immune response, especially by increasing the expression of tumor neoantigens specific to tumor cells, which are then attacked and destroyed. Exploiting this effect, cryoablation in combination with immunotherapy could be the key to treating early-stage breast cancers or patients who are unsuitable for surgery. According to some recent studies, there are other potential tools that could be used to enhance the therapeutic effect of cryoablation, such as FE3O4 nanoparticles or the manipulation of aquaporin expression. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the current evidence regarding the use, indications, advantages and disadvantages of cryoablation in the treatment of breast cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea Marra
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy.
| | - Federica Cicciarelli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Marcella Pasculli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Maroncelli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Veronica Rizzo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Roberto M, Barchiesi G, Resuli B, Verrico M, Speranza I, Cristofani L, Pediconi F, Tomao F, Botticelli A, Santini D. Sarcopenia in Breast Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:596. [PMID: 38339347 PMCID: PMC10854936 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16030596] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2024] [Revised: 01/20/2024] [Accepted: 01/23/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: We estimated the prevalence and clinical outcomes of sarcopenia among breast cancer patients. (2) Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out for the period between July 2023 and October 2023. Studies with breast cancer patients evaluated for sarcopenia in relation to overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), relapse of disease (DFS), pathological complete response (pCR), or toxicity to chemotherapy were included. (3) Results: Out of 359 screened studies, 16 were eligible for meta-analysis, including 6130 patients, of whom 5284 with non-MBC. Sarcopenia was evaluated with the computed tomography (CT) scan skeletal muscle index and, in two studies, with the dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) appendicular lean mass index. Using different classifications and cut-off points, overall, there were 2007 sarcopenic patients (33%), of whom 1901 (95%) presented with non-MBC. Sarcopenia was associated with a 33% and 29% higher risk of mortality and progression/relapse of disease, respectively. Sarcopenic patients were more likely to develop grade 3-4 toxicity (OR 3.58, 95% CI 2.11-6.06, p < 0.0001). In the neoadjuvant setting, a higher rate of pCR was observed among sarcopenic patients (49%) (OR 2.74, 95% CI 0.92-8.22). (4) Conclusions: Our meta-analysis confirms the correlation between sarcopenia and negative outcomes, especially in terms of higher toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michela Roberto
- UOC Oncologia A, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Dermatology, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University o f Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy; (M.R.); (G.B.); (M.V.); (I.S.); (L.C.); (A.B.); (D.S.)
| | - Giacomo Barchiesi
- UOC Oncologia A, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Dermatology, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University o f Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy; (M.R.); (G.B.); (M.V.); (I.S.); (L.C.); (A.B.); (D.S.)
| | - Blerina Resuli
- Department of Medicine V, University Hospital Munich, Ziemssenstraße 5, 80336 Munich, Germany
| | - Monica Verrico
- UOC Oncologia A, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Dermatology, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University o f Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy; (M.R.); (G.B.); (M.V.); (I.S.); (L.C.); (A.B.); (D.S.)
| | - Iolanda Speranza
- UOC Oncologia A, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Dermatology, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University o f Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy; (M.R.); (G.B.); (M.V.); (I.S.); (L.C.); (A.B.); (D.S.)
| | - Leonardo Cristofani
- UOC Oncologia A, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Dermatology, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University o f Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy; (M.R.); (G.B.); (M.V.); (I.S.); (L.C.); (A.B.); (D.S.)
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy;
| | - Federica Tomao
- Department of Maternal and Child Health and Urological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy;
| | - Andrea Botticelli
- UOC Oncologia A, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Dermatology, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University o f Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy; (M.R.); (G.B.); (M.V.); (I.S.); (L.C.); (A.B.); (D.S.)
| | - Daniele Santini
- UOC Oncologia A, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Dermatology, Policlinico Umberto I University Hospital, Sapienza University o f Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy; (M.R.); (G.B.); (M.V.); (I.S.); (L.C.); (A.B.); (D.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rizzo V, Cicciarelli F, Galati F, Moffa G, Maroncelli R, Pasculli M, Pediconi F. Could breast multiparametric MRI discriminate between pure ductal carcinoma in situ and microinvasive carcinoma? Acta Radiol 2024:2841851231225807. [PMID: 38196268 DOI: 10.1177/02841851231225807] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is often reclassified as invasive cancer in the final pathology report of the surgical specimen. It is of significant clinical relevance to acknowledge the possibility of underestimating invasive disease when utilizing preoperative biopsies for a DCIS diagnosis. In cases where such histologic upgrades occur, it is imperative to consider them in the preoperative planning process, including the potential inclusion of sentinel lymph node biopsy due to the risk of axillary lymph node metastasis. PURPOSE To assess the capability of breast multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MP-MRI) in differentiating between pure DCIS and microinvasive carcinoma (MIC). MATERIAL AND METHODS Between January 2018 and November 2022, this retrospective study enrolled patients with biopsy-proven DCIS who had undergone preoperative breast MP-MRI. We assessed various MP-MRI features, including size, morphology, margins, internal enhancement pattern, extent of disease, presence of peritumoral edema, time-intensity curve value, diffusion restriction, and ADC value. Subsequently, a logistic regression analysis was conducted to explore the association of these features with the pathological outcome. RESULTS Of 129 patients with biopsy-proven DCIS, 36 had foci of micro-infiltration on surgical specimens and eight were diagnosed with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). The presence of micro-infiltration foci was significantly associated with several MP-MRI features, including tumor size (P <0.001), clustered ring enhancement (P <0.001), segmental distribution (P <0.001), diffusion restriction (P = 0.005), and ADC values <1.3 × 10-3 mm2/s (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION Breast MP-MRI has the potential to predict the presence of micro-infiltration foci in biopsy-proven DCIS and may serve as a valuable tool for guiding therapeutic planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veronica Rizzo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences; Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Cicciarelli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences; Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences; Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences; Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Maroncelli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences; Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Marcella Pasculli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences; Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences; Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Cozzi A, Di Leo G, Houssami N, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Álvarez Benito M, Balleyguier C, Bazzocchi M, Bult P, Calabrese M, Camps Herrero J, Cartia F, Cassano E, Clauser P, de Lima Docema MF, Depretto C, Dominelli V, Forrai G, Girometti R, Harms SE, Hilborne S, Ienzi R, Lobbes MBI, Losio C, Mann RM, Montemezzi S, Obdeijn IM, Aksoy Ozcan U, Pediconi F, Pinker K, Preibsch H, Raya Povedano JL, Rossi Saccarelli C, Sacchetto D, Scaperrotta GP, Schlooz M, Szabó BK, Taylor DB, Ulus SÖ, Van Goethem M, Veltman J, Weigel S, Wenkel E, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. Preoperative breast MRI positively impacts surgical outcomes of needle biopsy-diagnosed pure DCIS: a patient-matched analysis from the MIPA study. Eur Radiol 2023:10.1007/s00330-023-10409-5. [PMID: 37999727 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10409-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2023] [Revised: 09/16/2023] [Accepted: 10/11/2023] [Indexed: 11/25/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate the influence of preoperative breast MRI on mastectomy and reoperation rates in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). METHODS The MIPA observational study database (7245 patients) was searched for patients aged 18-80 years with pure unilateral DCIS diagnosed at core needle or vacuum-assisted biopsy (CNB/VAB) and planned for primary surgery. Patients who underwent preoperative MRI (MRI group) were matched (1:1) to those who did not receive MRI (noMRI group) according to 8 confounding covariates that drive referral to MRI (age; hormonal status; familial risk; posterior-to-nipple diameter; BI-RADS category; lesion diameter; lesion presentation; surgical planning at conventional imaging). Surgical outcomes were compared between the matched groups with nonparametric statistics after calculating odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS Of 1005 women with pure unilateral DCIS at CNB/VAB (507 MRI group, 498 noMRI group), 309 remained in each group after matching. First-line mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 20.1% (62/309 patients, OR 2.03) compared to 11.0% in the noMRI group (34/309 patients, p = 0.003). The reoperation rate was 10.0% in the MRI group (31/309, OR for reoperation 0.40) and 22.0% in the noMRI group (68/309, p < 0.001), with a 2.53 OR of avoiding reoperation in the MRI group. The overall mastectomy rate was 23.3% in the MRI group (72/309, OR 1.40) and 17.8% in the noMRI group (55/309, p = 0.111). CONCLUSIONS Compared to those going directly to surgery, patients with pure DCIS at CNB/VAB who underwent preoperative MRI had a higher OR for first-line mastectomy but a substantially lower OR for reoperation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT When confounding factors behind MRI referral are accounted for in the comparison of patients with CNB/VAB-diagnosed pure unilateral DCIS, preoperative MRI yields a reduction of reoperations that is more than twice as high as the increase in overall mastectomies. KEY POINTS • Confounding factors cause imbalance when investigating the influence of preoperative MRI on surgical outcomes of pure DCIS. • When patient matching is applied to women with pure unilateral DCIS, reoperation rates are significantly reduced in women who underwent preoperative MRI. • The reduction of reoperations brought about by preoperative MRI is more than double the increase in overall mastectomies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Cozzi
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
- Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Giovanni Di Leo
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- The Daffodil Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney (Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW), Sydney, Australia
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
- Biomaps, UMR1281 INSERM, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Massimo Bazzocchi
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Peter Bult
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- Unit of Oncological and Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy
| | - Julia Camps Herrero
- Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitario de La Ribera, Alzira, Spain
- Ribera Salud Hospitals, Valencia, Spain
| | - Francesco Cartia
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Catherine Depretto
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Valeria Dominelli
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gábor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, MHEK Teaching Hospital, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, GE-RAD Kft, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Rossano Girometti
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Steven E Harms
- Breast Center of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
| | - Sarah Hilborne
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Raffaele Ienzi
- Department of Radiology, Di.Bi.MED, Policlinico Universitario Paolo Giaccone Università degli Studi di Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Marc B I Lobbes
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Imaging, Zuyderland Medical Center, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Claudio Losio
- Department of Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Inge-Marie Obdeijn
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Umit Aksoy Ozcan
- Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Atasehir Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy
| | - Katja Pinker
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Heike Preibsch
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | | | | | - Daniela Sacchetto
- Kiwifarm S.R.L., La Morra, Italy
- Disaster Medicine Service 118, ASL CN1, Levaldigi, Italy
| | | | - Margrethe Schlooz
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Botond K Szabó
- Department of Radiology, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Donna B Taylor
- Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
- Department of Radiology, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia
| | - Sila Ö Ulus
- Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Atasehir Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Mireille Van Goethem
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Radiology, Multidisciplinary Breast Clinic, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Jeroen Veltman
- Maatschap Radiologie Oost-Nederland, Oldenzaal, The Netherlands
| | - Stefanie Weigel
- Clinic for Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Evelyn Wenkel
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Cozzi A, Di Leo G, Houssami N, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Álvarez Benito M, Balleyguier C, Bazzocchi M, Bult P, Calabrese M, Camps Herrero J, Cartia F, Cassano E, Clauser P, de Lima Docema MF, Depretto C, Dominelli V, Forrai G, Girometti R, Harms SE, Hilborne S, Ienzi R, Lobbes MBI, Losio C, Mann RM, Montemezzi S, Obdeijn IM, Ozcan UA, Pediconi F, Pinker K, Preibsch H, Raya Povedano JL, Rossi Saccarelli C, Sacchetto D, Scaperrotta GP, Schlooz M, Szabó BK, Taylor DB, Ulus ÖS, Van Goethem M, Veltman J, Weigel S, Wenkel E, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. Screening and diagnostic breast MRI: how do they impact surgical treatment? Insights from the MIPA study. Eur Radiol 2023; 33:6213-6225. [PMID: 37138190 PMCID: PMC10415233 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09600-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2022] [Revised: 01/19/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To report mastectomy and reoperation rates in women who had breast MRI for screening (S-MRI subgroup) or diagnostic (D-MRI subgroup) purposes, using multivariable analysis for investigating the role of MRI referral/nonreferral and other covariates in driving surgical outcomes. METHODS The MIPA observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed breast cancer destined to have surgery as the primary treatment, in 27 centres worldwide. Mastectomy and reoperation rates were compared using non-parametric tests and multivariable analysis. RESULTS A total of 5828 patients entered analysis, 2763 (47.4%) did not undergo MRI (noMRI subgroup) and 3065 underwent MRI (52.6%); of the latter, 2441/3065 (79.7%) underwent MRI with preoperative intent (P-MRI subgroup), 510/3065 (16.6%) D-MRI, and 114/3065 S-MRI (3.7%). The reoperation rate was 10.5% for S-MRI, 8.2% for D-MRI, and 8.5% for P-MRI, while it was 11.7% for noMRI (p ≤ 0.023 for comparisons with D-MRI and P-MRI). The overall mastectomy rate (first-line mastectomy plus conversions from conserving surgery to mastectomy) was 39.5% for S-MRI, 36.2% for P-MRI, 24.1% for D-MRI, and 18.0% for noMRI. At multivariable analysis, using noMRI as reference, the odds ratios for overall mastectomy were 2.4 (p < 0.001) for S-MRI, 1.0 (p = 0.957) for D-MRI, and 1.9 (p < 0.001) for P-MRI. CONCLUSIONS Patients from the D-MRI subgroup had the lowest overall mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). This analysis offers an insight into how the initial indication for MRI affects the subsequent surgical treatment of breast cancer. KEY POINTS • Of 3065 breast MRI examinations, 79.7% were performed with preoperative intent (P-MRI), 16.6% were diagnostic (D-MRI), and 3.7% were screening (S-MRI) examinations. • The D-MRI subgroup had the lowest mastectomy rate (24.1%) among MRI subgroups and the lowest reoperation rate (8.2%) together with P-MRI (8.5%). • The S-MRI subgroup had the highest mastectomy rate (39.5%) which aligns with higher-than-average risk in this subgroup, with a reoperation rate (10.5%) not significantly different to that of all other subgroups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Cozzi
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Giovanni Di Leo
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- The Daffodil Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney (Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW), Sydney, Australia
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
- BioMaps (UMR1281), INSERM, CEA, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Massimo Bazzocchi
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Peter Bult
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- Unit of Oncological and Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy
| | | | - Francesco Cartia
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Catherine Depretto
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Valeria Dominelli
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gábor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, MHEK Teaching Hospital, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Rossano Girometti
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Steven E Harms
- Breast Center of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
| | - Sarah Hilborne
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Raffaele Ienzi
- Department of Radiology, Di.Bi.MED, Policlinico Universitario Paolo Giaccone, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Marc B I Lobbes
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Claudio Losio
- Department of Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Inge-Marie Obdeijn
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Umit A Ozcan
- Unit of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Structural Preclinical Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Heike Preibsch
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | | | | | - Daniela Sacchetto
- Kiwifarm S.r.l, La Morra, Italy
- Disaster Medicine Service 118, ASL CN1, Saluzzo, Italy
- CRIMEDIM, Research Center in Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale "Amedeo Avogadro", Novara, Italy
| | | | - Margrethe Schlooz
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Botond K Szabó
- Department of Radiology, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Donna B Taylor
- Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
- Department of Radiology, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia
| | - Özden S Ulus
- Unit of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Mireille Van Goethem
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Radiology, Multidisciplinary Breast Clinic, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium
| | - Jeroen Veltman
- Maatschap Radiologie Oost-Nederland, Oldenzaal, The Netherlands
| | - Stefanie Weigel
- Institute of Clinical Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Evelyn Wenkel
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Ospedale Universitario S. Maria della Misericordia, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Moffa G, Galati F, Maroncelli R, Rizzo V, Cicciarelli F, Pasculli M, Pediconi F. Diagnostic Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography versus Conventional Imaging in Women with Dense Breasts. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:2520. [PMID: 37568883 PMCID: PMC10416841 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13152520] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Revised: 07/13/2023] [Accepted: 07/24/2023] [Indexed: 08/13/2023] Open
Abstract
The aim of this prospective study was to compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) versus digital mammography (DM) combined with breast ultrasound (BUS) in women with dense breasts. Between March 2021 and February 2022, patients eligible for CEM with the breast composition category ACR BI-RADS c-d at DM and an abnormal finding (BI-RADS 3-4-5) at DM and/or BUS were considered. During CEM, a nonionic iodinated contrast agent (Iohexol 350 mg I/mL, 1.5 mL/kg) was power-injected intravenously. Images were evaluated independently by two breast radiologists. Findings classified as BI-RADS 1-3 were considered benign, while BI-RADS 4-5 were considered malignant. In case of discrepancies, the higher category was considered for DM+BUS. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated, using histology/≥12-month follow-up as gold standards. In total, 51 patients with 65 breast lesions were included. 59 (90.7%) abnormal findings were detected at DM+BUS, and 65 (100%) at CEM. The inter-reader agreement was excellent (Cohen's k = 0.87 for DM+BUS and 0.97 for CEM). CEM showed a 93.5% sensitivity (vs. 90.3% for DM+BUS), a 79.4-82.4% specificity (vs. 32.4-35.5% for DM+BUS) (McNemar p = 0.006), a 80.6-82.9% PPV (vs. 54.9-56.0% for DM+BUS), a 93.1-93.3% NPV (vs. 78.6-80.0% for DM+BUS), and a 86.1-87.7% accuracy (vs. 60.0-61.5% for DM+BUS). The AUC was higher for CEM than for DM+BUS (0.865 vs. 0.613 for Reader 1, and 0.880 vs. 0.628, for Reader 2) (p < 0.001). In conclusion, CEM had a better diagnostic performance than DM and BUS alone and combined together in patients with dense breasts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy; (F.G.); (R.M.); (V.R.); (F.C.); (M.P.); (F.P.)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Schiaffino S, Pinker K, Cozzi A, Magni V, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PAT, Camps Herrero J, Clauser P, Fallenberg EM, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich T, Kilburn-Toppin F, Kuhl CK, Lesaru M, Mann RM, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Sardanelli F, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Zackrisson S, Pijnappel RM. European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) guidelines on the management of axillary lymphadenopathy after COVID-19 vaccination: 2023 revision. Insights Imaging 2023; 14:126. [PMID: 37466753 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-023-01453-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 05/14/2023] [Indexed: 07/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Axillary lymphadenopathy is a common side effect of COVID-19 vaccination, leading to increased imaging-detected asymptomatic and symptomatic unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy. This has threatened to negatively impact the workflow of breast imaging services, leading to the release of ten recommendations by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) in August 2021. Considering the rapidly changing scenario and data scarcity, these initial recommendations kept a highly conservative approach. As of 2023, according to newly acquired evidence, EUSOBI proposes the following updates, in order to reduce unnecessary examinations and avoid delaying necessary examinations. First, recommendation n. 3 has been revised to state that breast examinations should not be delayed or rescheduled because of COVID-19 vaccination, as evidence from the first pandemic waves highlights how delayed or missed screening tests have a negative effect on breast cancer morbidity and mortality, and that there is a near-zero risk of subsequent malignant findings in asymptomatic patients who have unilateral lymphadenopathy and no suspicious breast findings. Second, recommendation n. 7 has been revised to simplify follow-up strategies: in patients without breast cancer history and no imaging findings suspicious for cancer, symptomatic and asymptomatic imaging-detected unilateral lymphadenopathy on the same side of recent COVID-19 vaccination (within 12 weeks) should be classified as a benign finding (BI-RADS 2) and no further work-up should be pursued. All other recommendations issued by EUSOBI in 2021 remain valid.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Schiaffino
- Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland (IIMSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Katja Pinker
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | - Andrea Cozzi
- Imaging Institute of Southern Switzerland (IIMSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Veronica Magni
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Paola Clauser
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum Rechts Der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Michael H Fuchsjäger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas Helbich
- Division of General and Paediatric Radiology, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Aachen, Germany
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Fundeni Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | | | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kripa E, Rizzo V, Galati F, Moffa G, Cicciarelli F, Catalano C, Pediconi F. Do body composition parameters correlate with response to targeted therapy in ER+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients? Role of sarcopenia and obesity. Front Oncol 2022; 12:987012. [PMID: 36212446 PMCID: PMC9538503 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.987012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2022] [Accepted: 08/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To investigate the association between body composition parameters, sarcopenia, obesity and prognosis in patients with metastatic ER+/HER2- breast cancer under therapy with cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors. Methods 92 patients with biopsy-proven metastatic ER+/HER2- breast cancer, treated with CDK 4/6 inhibitors between 2018 and 2021 at our center, were included in this retrospective analysis. Visceral Adipose Tissue (VAT), Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue (SAT) and Skeletal Muscle Index (SMI) were measured before starting therapy with CDK 4/6 inhibitors (Palbociclib, Abemaciclib or Ribociclib). Measurements were performed on a computed tomography-derived abdominal image at third lumbar vertebra (L3) level by an automatic dedicated software (Quantib body composition®, Rotterdam, Netherlands). Visceral obesity was defined as a VAT area > 130 cm2. Sarcopenia was defined as SMI < 40 cm2/m2. Changes in breast lesion size were evaluated after 6 months of treatment. Response to therapy was assessed according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. Spearman’s correlation and χ2 analyses were performed. Results Out of 92 patients, 30 were included in the evaluation. Of the 30 patients (mean age 53 ± 12 years), 7 patients were sarcopenic, 16 were obese, while 7 patients were neither sarcopenic nor obese. Statistical analyses showed that good response to therapy was correlated to higher SMI values (p < 0.001), higher VAT values (p = 0.008) and obesity (p = 0.007); poor response to therapy was correlated to sarcopenia (p < 0.001). Moreover, there was a significant association between sarcopenia and menopause (p = 0.021) and between sarcopenia and the persistence of axillary lymphadenopathies after treatment (p = 0.003), while the disappearance of axillary lymphadenopathies was associated with obesity (p = 0.028). Conclusions There is a growing interest in body composition, especially in the field of breast cancer. Our results showed an interesting correlation between sarcopenia and progression of disease, and demonstrated that VAT can positively influence the response to targeted therapy with CDK 4/6 inhibitors. Larger-scale studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results. Clinical Relevance Sarcopenia and obesity seem to predict negative outcomes in many oncologic entities. Their prevalence and impact in current breast cancer care are promising but still controversial.
Collapse
|
9
|
Galati F, Rizzo V, Moffa G, Caramanico C, Kripa E, Cerbelli B, D’Amati G, Pediconi F. Radiologic-pathologic correlation in breast cancer: do MRI biomarkers correlate with pathologic features and molecular subtypes? Eur Radiol Exp 2022; 6:39. [PMID: 35934721 PMCID: PMC9357588 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-022-00289-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2021] [Accepted: 06/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Breast cancer (BC) includes different pathological and molecular subtypes. This study aimed to investigate whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) could reliably predict the molecular status of BC, comparing mpMRI features with pathological and immunohistochemical results. Methods This retrospective study included 156 patients with an ultrasound-guided biopsy-proven BC, who underwent breast mpMRI (including diffusion-weighted imaging) on a 3-T scanner from 2017 to 2020. Histopathological analyses were performed on the surgical specimens. Kolmogorov–Smirnov Z, χ2, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results Fifteen patients were affected with ductal carcinoma in situ, 122 by invasive carcinoma of no special type, and 19 with invasive lobular carcinoma. Out of a total of 141 invasive cancers, 45 were luminal A-like, 54 luminal B-like, 5 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive, and 37 triple negative. The regression analyses showed that size < 2 cm predicted luminal A-like status (p = 0.025), while rim enhancement (p < 0.001), intralesional necrosis (p = 0.001), peritumoural oedema (p < 0.001), and axillary adenopathies (p = 0.012) were negative predictors. Oppositely, round shape (p = 0.001), rim enhancement (p < 0.001), intralesional necrosis (p < 0.001), and peritumoural oedema (p < 0.001) predicted triple-negative status. Conclusions mpMRI has been confirmed to be a valid noninvasive predictor of BC subtypes, especially luminal A and triple negative. Considering the central role of pathology in BC diagnosis and immunohistochemical profiling in the current precision medicine era, a detailed radiologic-pathologic correlation seems vital to properly evaluate BC.
Collapse
|
10
|
Mann RM, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PAT, Camps-Herrero J, Clauser P, Fallenberg EM, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Helbich TH, Killburn-Toppin F, Lesaru M, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Sardanelli F, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Zackrisson S, Gilbert FJ, Kuhl CK. Breast cancer screening in women with extremely dense breasts recommendations of the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI). Eur Radiol 2022; 32:4036-4045. [PMID: 35258677 PMCID: PMC9122856 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08617-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 115] [Impact Index Per Article: 57.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/27/2022] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Breast density is an independent risk factor for the development of breast cancer and also decreases the sensitivity of mammography for screening. Consequently, women with extremely dense breasts face an increased risk of late diagnosis of breast cancer. These women are, therefore, underserved with current mammographic screening programs. The results of recent studies reporting on contrast-enhanced breast MRI as a screening method in women with extremely dense breasts provide compelling evidence that this approach can enable an important reduction in breast cancer mortality for these women and is cost-effective. Because there is now a valid option to improve breast cancer screening, the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) recommends that women should be informed about their breast density. EUSOBI thus calls on all providers of mammography screening to share density information with the women being screened. In light of the available evidence, in women aged 50 to 70 years with extremely dense breasts, the EUSOBI now recommends offering screening breast MRI every 2 to 4 years. The EUSOBI acknowledges that it may currently not be possible to offer breast MRI immediately and everywhere and underscores that quality assurance procedures need to be established, but urges radiological societies and policymakers to act on this now. Since the wishes and values of individual women differ, in screening the principles of shared decision-making should be embraced. In particular, women should be counselled on the benefits and risks of mammography and MRI-based screening, so that they are capable of making an informed choice about their preferred screening method. KEY POINTS: • The recommendations in Figure 1 summarize the key points of the manuscript.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ritse M Mann
- Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Julia Camps-Herrero
- Hospitales Ribera Salud, Avda.Cortes Valencianas, 58, 46015, Valencia, Spain
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine &; Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich (TUM), Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Germany
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Michael H Fuchsjäger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Fleur Killburn-Toppin
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB20QQ, UK
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Carol Davila University, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele,, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, Netherlands
- Dutch Expert Centre for Screening (LRCB), Wijchenseweg 101, 6538 SW, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara
- Department of Radiology, Sorbonne Université, APHP, Hôpital Tenon, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB20QQ, UK
| | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Galati F, Rizzo V, Trimboli RM, Kripa E, Maroncelli R, Pediconi F. MRI as a biomarker for breast cancer diagnosis and prognosis. BJR Open 2022; 4:20220002. [PMID: 36105423 PMCID: PMC9459861 DOI: 10.1259/bjro.20220002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2022] [Revised: 05/01/2022] [Accepted: 05/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed female invasive cancer in Western countries and the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Nowadays, tumor heterogeneity is a well-known characteristic of BC, since it includes several nosological entities characterized by different morphologic features, clinical course and response to treatment. Thus, with the spread of molecular biology technologies and the growing knowledge of the biological processes underlying the development of BC, the importance of imaging biomarkers as non-invasive information about tissue hallmarks has progressively grown. To date, breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered indispensable in breast imaging practice, with widely recognized indications such as BC screening in females at increased risk, locoregional staging and neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) monitoring. Moreover, breast MRI is increasingly used to assess not only the morphologic features of the pathological process but also to characterize individual phenotypes for targeted therapies, building on developments in genomics and molecular biology features. The aim of this review is to explore the role of breast multiparametric MRI in providing imaging biomarkers, leading to an improved differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions and to a customized management of BC patients in monitoring and predicting response to treatment. Finally, we discuss how breast MRI biomarkers offer one of the most fertile ground for artificial intelligence (AI) applications. In the era of personalized medicine, with the development of omics-technologies, machine learning and big data, the role of imaging biomarkers is embracing new opportunities for BC diagnosis and treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, “Sapienza” - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome, Italy
| | - Veronica Rizzo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, “Sapienza” - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Endi Kripa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, “Sapienza” - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome, Italy
| | - Roberto Maroncelli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, “Sapienza” - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, “Sapienza” - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Mammone G, Roazzi L, Merlino L, Specchia M, Galati F, Piccioni M, Ballesio L, Pediconi F, de Marchis L. 155P A retrospective analysis of women at high risk of breast cancer: A single centre surveillance experience. Ann Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.03.172] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
|
13
|
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza—University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy;
| | | | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza—University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy;
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-06-4455602; Fax: +39-06-490243
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease nowadays, including different biological subtypes with a variety of possible treatments, which aim to achieve the best outcome in terms of response to therapy and overall survival. In recent years breast imaging has evolved considerably, and the ultimate goal is to predict these strong phenotypic differences noninvasively. Indeed, breast cancer multiparametric studies can highlight not only qualitative imaging parameters, as the presence/absence of a likely malignant finding, but also quantitative parameters, suggesting clinical-pathological features through the evaluation of imaging biomarkers. A further step has been the introduction of artificial intelligence and in particular radiogenomics, that investigates the relationship between breast cancer imaging characteristics and tumor molecular, genomic and proliferation features. In this review, we discuss the main techniques currently in use for breast imaging, their respective fields of use and their technological and diagnostic innovations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, "Sapienza" - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.
| | - Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, "Sapienza" - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, "Sapienza" - University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161 Rome, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Devercelli M, Bellotti G, Angeli E, Bellotti F, Bertinatti E, Campana C, Clarici L, Falsini S, Favagrossa S, Fiacchi S, Fini M, Gorgone G, Mantuano L, Pediconi F, Pirro R, Priami D, Savoca L, Sermenghi G, Vuillermoz K, Caruso R. [Interregional mapping of continuing medical education experiences during the covid phase and orientation towards future education: a multiphase study.]. Recenti Prog Med 2021; 112:824-836. [PMID: 34924581 DOI: 10.1701/3710.37009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This study developed and validated three questionnaires addressed to the accrediting bodies of the CME system, the providers and the end-users to investigate facilitating factors, barriers and achieved results. Facilitating factors, barriers and achieved results were then described, and the predictors of the achieved result were identified. METHODS Multiphase and multi-method study. RESULTS The developed questionnaires show evidence of validity and reliability. 8098 healthcare professionals, 10 accrediting bodies and 206 providers were enrolled to the study. The facilitating factors show the greater predictive capacity in explaining the variance of the perceptions of achieved results in all three groups. DISCUSSION The common perspectives of the participants guided the creating of a framework aimed to provide guidance for strengthening facilitating factors regarding the activities of accrediting bodies, providers, and end-users of CME education.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Silvia Favagrossa
- PoliS-Lombardia, Istituto regionale per il supporto alle politiche della Lombardia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Rosario Caruso
- IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milano
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Panzironi G, Moffa G, Galati F, Pediconi F. Ultrasound-guided 8-Gauge vacuum-assisted excision for selected B3 breast lesions: a preliminary experience. Radiol Med 2021; 127:57-64. [PMID: 34800217 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-021-01429-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/14/2021] [Accepted: 11/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Nowadays, surgical excision is no longer justified for all B3 lesions and a minimally-invasive therapeutic treatment has been encouraged. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and the therapeutic efficacy of ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted excision (US-VAE) for the treatment of selected breast lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3). MATERIAL AND METHODS From July 2018 to December 2019, 11/48 breast lesions classified as B3 after ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy were treated with US-VAE in our Institution. Inclusion criteria were: B3 nodules ultrasonographically detectable for which VAE is recommended by international guidelines2, size ranging between 5 and 25 mm, circumscribed margins, and lesion position at least 5 mm from the skin and the nipple. A radiological follow-up to evaluate the completeness of excision, the presence of post-procedural hematoma or of residual disease/recurrence was performed after 10 and 30 days and 6 and 12 months. 12-month ultrasound was considered the gold standard. All patients were asked to complete a satisfaction survey and a full assessment of the costs of US-VAE was performed. RESULTS Complete excision was achieved in 81.8% of US-VAE. No lesions were upgraded to carcinoma and no patients had to undergo surgery. No complications occurred during or after US-VAE. All patients were satisfied with the procedure and the cosmetic result (100%). US-VAE cost approximately 422 Euros per procedure. CONCLUSION US-VAE has proven to be an optimal tool for the therapeutic excision of selected B3 lesions, with high success rate, good patient compliance and considerable money savings compared to surgery. This technique has the potential to reduce unnecessary surgery and healthcare costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giovanna Panzironi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
| | - Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Sardanelli F, Trimboli RM, Houssami N, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Álvarez Benito M, Balleyguier C, Bazzocchi M, Bult P, Calabrese M, Camps Herrero J, Cartia F, Cassano E, Clauser P, Cozzi A, de Andrade DA, de Lima Docema MF, Depretto C, Dominelli V, Forrai G, Girometti R, Harms SE, Hilborne S, Ienzi R, Lobbes MBI, Losio C, Mann RM, Montemezzi S, Obdeijn IM, Ozcan UA, Pediconi F, Pinker K, Preibsch H, Raya Povedano JL, Sacchetto D, Scaperrotta GP, Schiaffino S, Schlooz M, Szabó BK, Taylor DB, Ulus ÖS, Van Goethem M, Veltman J, Weigel S, Wenkel E, Zuiani C, Di Leo G. Magnetic resonance imaging before breast cancer surgery: results of an observational multicenter international prospective analysis (MIPA). Eur Radiol 2021; 32:1611-1623. [PMID: 34643778 PMCID: PMC8831264 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08240-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2021] [Revised: 07/20/2021] [Accepted: 08/02/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can inform surgical planning but might cause overtreatment by increasing the mastectomy rate. The Multicenter International Prospective Analysis (MIPA) study investigated this controversial issue. METHODS This observational study enrolled women aged 18-80 years with biopsy-proven breast cancer, who underwent MRI in addition to conventional imaging (mammography and/or breast ultrasonography) or conventional imaging alone before surgery as routine practice at 27 centers. Exclusion criteria included planned neoadjuvant therapy, pregnancy, personal history of any cancer, and distant metastases. RESULTS Of 5896 analyzed patients, 2763 (46.9%) had conventional imaging only (noMRI group), and 3133 (53.1%) underwent MRI that was performed for diagnosis, screening, or unknown purposes in 692/3133 women (22.1%), with preoperative intent in 2441/3133 women (77.9%, MRI group). Patients in the MRI group were younger, had denser breasts, more cancers ≥ 20 mm, and a higher rate of invasive lobular histology than patients who underwent conventional imaging alone (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). Mastectomy was planned based on conventional imaging in 22.4% (MRI group) versus 14.4% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). The additional planned mastectomy rate in the MRI group was 11.3%. The overall performed first- plus second-line mastectomy rate was 36.3% (MRI group) versus 18.0% (noMRI group) (p < 0.001). In women receiving conserving surgery, MRI group had a significantly lower reoperation rate (8.5% versus 11.7%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Clinicians requested breast MRI for women with a higher a priori probability of receiving mastectomy. MRI was associated with 11.3% more mastectomies, and with 3.2% fewer reoperations in the breast conservation subgroup. KEY POINTS • In 19% of patients of the MIPA study, breast MRI was performed for screening or diagnostic purposes. • The current patient selection to preoperative breast MRI implies an 11% increase in mastectomies, counterbalanced by a 3% reduction of the reoperation rate. • Data from the MIPA study can support discussion in tumor boards when preoperative MRI is under consideration and should be shared with patients to achieve informed decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. .,Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Nehmat Houssami
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | | | - Massimo Bazzocchi
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Peter Bult
- Department of Pathology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- Unit of Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy
| | | | - Francesco Cartia
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Andrea Cozzi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | | | - Catherine Depretto
- Unit of Breast Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Valeria Dominelli
- Breast Imaging Division, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Gábor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, MHEK Teaching Hospital, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Rossano Girometti
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Steven E Harms
- Breast Center of Northwest Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA
| | - Sarah Hilborne
- Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Raffaele Ienzi
- Department of Radiology, Di.Bi.MED, Università degli Studi di Palermo, Policlinico Universitario Paolo Giaccone, Palermo, Italy
| | - Marc B I Lobbes
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Claudio Losio
- Department of Breast Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- Department of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Inge-Marie Obdeijn
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Umit A Ozcan
- Unit of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Heike Preibsch
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | | | - Daniela Sacchetto
- Kiwifarm S.R.L, La Morra, Italy.,Disaster Medicine Service 118, ASL CN1, Saluzzo, Italy.,CRIMEDIM, Research Center in Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale "Amedeo Avogadro", Novara, Italy
| | | | - Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Margrethe Schlooz
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Botond K Szabó
- Department of Radiology, Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Donna B Taylor
- Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.,Department of Radiology, Royal Perth Hospital, Perth, Australia
| | - Özden S Ulus
- Unit of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University School of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Mireille Van Goethem
- Gynecological Oncology Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Radiology, Multidisciplinary Breast Clinic, Antwerp University Hospital, University of Antwerp, Antwerpen, Belgium
| | - Jeroen Veltman
- Maatschap Radiologie Oost-Nederland, Oldenzaal, The Netherlands
| | - Stefanie Weigel
- Institute of Clinical Radiology and Reference Center for Mammography, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Evelyn Wenkel
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, Department of Medicine, Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine, Italy
| | - Giovanni Di Leo
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Rodolfo Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Cantisani V, David E, Barr RG, Radzina M, de Soccio V, Elia D, De Felice C, Pediconi F, Gigli S, Occhiato R, Messineo D, Fresilli D, Ballesio L, D'Ambrosio F. US-Elastography for Breast Lesion Characterization: Prospective Comparison of US BIRADS, Strain Elastography and Shear wave Elastography. Ultraschall Med 2021; 42:533-540. [PMID: 32330993 DOI: 10.1055/a-1134-4937] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the diagnostic performance of strain elastography (SE) and 2 D shear wave elastography (SWE) and SE/SWE combination in comparison with conventional multiparametric ultrasound (US) with respect to improving BI-RADS classification results and differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions using a qualitative and quantitative assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this prospective study, 130 histologically proven breast masses were evaluated with baseline US, color Doppler ultrasound (CDUS), SE and SWE (Toshiba Aplio 500 with a 7-15 MHz wide-band linear transducer). Each lesion was classified according to the BIRADS lexicon by evaluating the size, the B-mode and color Doppler features, the SE qualitative (point color scale) and SE semi-quantitative (strain ratio) methods, and quantitative SWE. Histological results were compared with BIRADS, strain ratio (SR) and shear wave elastography (SWE) all performed by one investigator blinded to the clinical examination and mammographic results at the time of the US examination. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the diagnostic performance of B-mode US, SE, SWE, and their combination. RESULTS Histological examination revealed 47 benign and 83 malignant breast lesions. The accuracy of SR was statistically significantly higher than SWE (sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 89.2 %, 76.6 % and 0.83 for SR and 72.3 %, 66.0 % and 0.69 for SWE, respectively, p = 0.003) but not higher than B-mode US (B-mode US sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 85.5 %, 78.8 %, 0.821, respectively, p = 1.000). CONCLUSION Our experience suggests that conventional US in combination with both SE and SWE is a valid tool that can be useful in the clinical setting, can improve BIRADS category assessment and may help in the differentiation of benign from malignant breast lesions, with SE having higher accuracy than SWE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vito Cantisani
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Emanuele David
- Radiological Sciences, Radiology Unit, Papardo-Hospital, Messina, Italy, Messina, Italy
| | - Richard G Barr
- Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Youngstown, United States
| | - Maija Radzina
- Radiology Department, Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga Stradins University, Faculty of Medicine, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
| | - Valeria de Soccio
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Daniela Elia
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Carlo De Felice
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | | | - Rossella Occhiato
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Daniela Messineo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Daniele Fresilli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Laura Ballesio
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Ferdinando D'Ambrosio
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Bonelli LA, Calabrese M, Belli P, Corcione S, Losio C, Montemezzi S, Pediconi F, Petrillo A, Zuiani C, Camera L, Carbonaro LA, Cozzi A, De Falco Alfano D, Gristina L, Panzeri M, Poirè I, Schiaffino S, Tosto S, Trecate G, Trimboli RM, Valdora F, Viganò S, Sardanelli F. MRI versus Mammography plus Ultrasound in Women at Intermediate Breast Cancer Risk: Study Design and Protocol of the MRIB Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Trial. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11:diagnostics11091635. [PMID: 34573983 PMCID: PMC8469187 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11091635] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2021] [Revised: 08/27/2021] [Accepted: 08/31/2021] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
In women at high/intermediate lifetime risk of breast cancer (BC-LTR), contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) added to mammography ± ultrasound (MX ± US) increases sensitivity but decreases specificity. Screening with MRI alone is an alternative and potentially more cost-effective strategy. Here, we describe the study protocol and the characteristics of enrolled patients for MRIB feasibility, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, which aims to compare MRI alone versus MX+US in women at intermediate breast cancer risk (aged 40-59, with a 15-30% BC-LTR and/or extremely dense breasts). Two screening rounds per woman were planned in ten centers experienced in MRI screening, the primary endpoint being the rate of cancers detected in the 2 arms after 5 years of follow-up. From July 2013 to November 2015, 1254 women (mean age 47 years) were enrolled: 624 were assigned to MX+US and 630 to MRI. Most of them were aged below 50 (72%) and premenopausal (45%), and 52% used oral contraceptives. Among postmenopausal women, 15% had used hormone replacement therapy. Breast and/or ovarian cancer in mothers and/or sisters were reported by 37% of enrolled women, 79% had extremely dense breasts, and 41% had a 15-30% BC-LTR. The distribution of the major determinants of breast cancer risk profiles (breast density and family history of breast and ovarian cancer) of enrolled women varied across centers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luigina Ada Bonelli
- Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy;
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-010-5558502
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- Unit of Diagnostic Senology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy; (M.C.); (L.G.); (S.T.); (F.V.)
| | - Paolo Belli
- Department of Radiological, Radiotherapic and Hematological Sciences, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Roma, Italy;
| | - Stefano Corcione
- Breast Imaging Unit, Arcispedale Sant’Anna, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Ferrara, 44124 Cona, Italy; (S.C.); (D.D.F.A.)
| | - Claudio Losio
- Unit of Senology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milano, Italy; (C.L.); (M.P.)
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- Unit of Radiology BT, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, 37126 Verona, Italy; (S.M.); (L.C.)
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Università degli Studi “La Sapienza”, 00161 Roma, Italy;
| | - Antonella Petrillo
- Radiology Unit, Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G. Pascale, 80131 Napoli, Italy;
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria “Santa Maria della Misericordia”, Università degli Studi di Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy;
| | - Lucia Camera
- Unit of Radiology BT, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, 37126 Verona, Italy; (S.M.); (L.C.)
| | - Luca Alessandro Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy; (L.A.C.); (S.S.); (F.S.)
- Department of Radiology, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, 20162 Milano, Italy
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20122 Milano, Italy
| | - Andrea Cozzi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (A.C.); (R.M.T.)
| | - Daniele De Falco Alfano
- Breast Imaging Unit, Arcispedale Sant’Anna, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Ferrara, 44124 Cona, Italy; (S.C.); (D.D.F.A.)
- Mammography Center, Radiology Unit, Policlinico Sant’Orsola–Malpighi, 40138 Bologna, Italy
| | - Licia Gristina
- Unit of Diagnostic Senology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy; (M.C.); (L.G.); (S.T.); (F.V.)
| | - Marta Panzeri
- Unit of Senology, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, 20132 Milano, Italy; (C.L.); (M.P.)
| | - Ilaria Poirè
- Unit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy;
| | - Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy; (L.A.C.); (S.S.); (F.S.)
| | - Simona Tosto
- Unit of Diagnostic Senology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy; (M.C.); (L.G.); (S.T.); (F.V.)
| | - Giovanna Trecate
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milano, Italy; (G.T.); (S.V.)
| | - Rubina Manuela Trimboli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (A.C.); (R.M.T.)
- Breast Imaging and Screening Unit, Department of Radiology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center—IRCCS, 20089 Rozzano, Italy
| | - Francesca Valdora
- Unit of Diagnostic Senology, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, 16132 Genova, Italy; (M.C.); (L.G.); (S.T.); (F.V.)
| | - Sara Viganò
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, 20133 Milano, Italy; (G.T.); (S.V.)
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy; (L.A.C.); (S.S.); (F.S.)
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy; (A.C.); (R.M.T.)
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Schiaffino S, Pinker K, Magni V, Cozzi A, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PAT, Camps Herrero J, Clauser P, Fallenberg EM, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Helbich TH, Kilburn-Toppin F, Kuhl CK, Lesaru M, Mann RM, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Zackrisson S, Gilbert FJ, Sardanelli F. Axillary lymphadenopathy at the time of COVID-19 vaccination: ten recommendations from the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI). Insights Imaging 2021; 12:119. [PMID: 34417642 PMCID: PMC8378785 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-021-01062-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2021] [Accepted: 07/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Unilateral axillary lymphadenopathy is a frequent mild side effect of COVID-19 vaccination. European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) proposes ten recommendations to standardise its management and reduce unnecessary additional imaging and invasive procedures: (1) in patients with previous history of breast cancer, vaccination should be performed in the contralateral arm or in the thigh; (2) collect vaccination data for all patients referred to breast imaging services, including patients undergoing breast cancer staging and follow-up imaging examinations; (3) perform breast imaging examinations preferentially before vaccination or at least 12 weeks after the last vaccine dose; (4) in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, apply standard imaging protocols regardless of vaccination status; (5) in any case of symptomatic or imaging-detected axillary lymphadenopathy before vaccination or at least 12 weeks after, examine with appropriate imaging the contralateral axilla and both breasts to exclude malignancy; (6) in case of axillary lymphadenopathy contralateral to the vaccination side, perform standard work-up; (7) in patients without breast cancer history and no suspicious breast imaging findings, lymphadenopathy only ipsilateral to the vaccination side within 12 weeks after vaccination can be considered benign or probably-benign, depending on clinical context; (8) in patients without breast cancer history, post-vaccination lymphadenopathy coupled with suspicious breast finding requires standard work-up, including biopsy when appropriate; (9) in patients with breast cancer history, interpret and manage post-vaccination lymphadenopathy considering the timeframe from vaccination and overall nodal metastatic risk; (10) complex or unclear cases should be managed by the multidisciplinary team.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria.,Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Veronica Magni
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Cozzi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine & Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM) , München , Germany
| | - Gábor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Michael H Fuchsjäger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of General and Pediatric Radiology, Research Group: Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Fundeni Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological, and Pathological Sciences , Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza" , Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | | | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Marzocca F, Moffa G, Landi VN, Panzironi G, Kirchin MA, Pediconi F, Galati F. Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI of the breast: can contrast agent injection rate impact background parenchymal enhancement? Acta Radiol 2021; 63:1173-1179. [PMID: 34323589 DOI: 10.1177/02841851211034038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Normal background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) is a dynamic parameter affected by multiple factors. PURPOSE To determine whether contrast agent injection rate affects the degree of BPE in women undergoing breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 85 patients included in our prospective study randomly received 0.1 mmol/kg gadoteridol at a rate of 3 mL/s (group A; n = 46) or 2 mL/s (group B; n = 39). Breast MRI was performed at 3T using a standard protocol including postcontrast axial 3D GRE T1-weighted sequences. Two expert breast radiologists, blinded to clinical and radiological information, independently quantified BPE on early postcontrast subtracted images, assigning a score of 1-4. Mean comparison and regression analysis were performed to assess the influence of injection rate on BPE. RESULTS Groups were homogeneous in terms of age and final BI-RADS score. The mean BPE score was significantly lower among patients in group A (mean of two readers: 1.36 vs. 1.90; P < 0.01) with 70%-72% of patients assigned a BPE score of 1, compared with 36%-38% of patients in group B. Lower BPE scores were noted with the higher flow rate in subgroup analyses of both pre- and postmenopausal women, although the effect was more evident in premenopausal women. Regression analysis confirmed that the likelihood of a BPE 1 score was significantly increased with a higher flow rate (P < 0.01). The inter-reader agreement was excellent (0.83). CONCLUSION A higher contrast agent injection flow rate (3 mL/s) during breast MRI significantly reduces the degree of BPE, potentially allowing improved diagnostic accuracy by reducing false-positive and false-negative findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Flaminia Marzocca
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Giovanna Panzironi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Rizzo V, Moffa G, Kripa E, Caramanico C, Pediconi F, Galati F. Preoperative Staging in Breast Cancer: Intraindividual Comparison of Unenhanced MRI Combined With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced-MRI. Front Oncol 2021; 11:661945. [PMID: 34017683 PMCID: PMC8130555 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.661945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2021] [Accepted: 04/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives To evaluate the accuracy in lesion detection and size assessment of Unenhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging combined with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (UE-MRI+DBT) and Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (DCE-MRI), in women with known breast cancer. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on 84 patients with histological diagnosis of breast cancer, who underwent MRI on a 3T scanner and DBT over 2018-2019, in our Institution. Two radiologists, with 15 and 7 years of experience in breast imaging respectively, reviewed DCE-MRI and UE-MRI (including DWI and T2-w) + DBT images in separate reading sections, unaware of the final histological examination. DCE-MRI and UE-MRI+DBT sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV) and accuracy were calculated, using histology as the gold standard. Spearman correlation and regression analyses were performed to evaluate lesion size agreement between DCE-MRI vs Histology, UE-MRI+DBT vs Histology, and DCE-MRI vs UE-MRI+DBT. Inter-reader agreement was evaluated using Cohen’s κ coefficient. McNemar test was used to identify differences in terms of detection rate between the two methodological approaches. Spearman’s correlation analysis was also performed to evaluate the correlation between ADC values and histological features. Results 109 lesions were confirmed on histological examination. DCE-MRI showed high sensitivity (100% Reader 1, 98% Reader 2), good PPV (89% Reader 1, 90% Reader 2) and accuracy (90% for both readers). UE-MRI+DBT showed 97% sensitivity, 91% PPV and 92% accuracy, for both readers. Lesion size Spearman coefficient were 0.94 (Reader 1) and 0.91 (Reader 2) for DCE-MRI vs Histology; 0.91 (Reader 1) and 0.90 (Reader 2) for UE-MRI+DBT vs Histology (p-value <0.001). DCE-MRI vs UE-MRI+DBT regression coefficient was 0.96 for Reader 1 and 0.94 for Reader 2. Inter-reader agreement was 0.79 for DCE-MRI and 0.94 for UE-MRI+DBT. McNemar test did not show a statistically significant difference between DCE-MRI and UE-MRI+DBT (McNemar test p-value >0.05). Spearman analyses showed an inverse correlation between ADC values and histological grade (p-value <0.001). Conclusions DCE-MRI was the most sensitive imaging technique in breast cancer preoperative staging. However, UE-MRI+DBT demonstrated good sensitivity and accuracy in lesion detection and tumor size assessment. Thus, UE-MRI could be a valid alternative when patients have already performed DBT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veronica Rizzo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Endi Kripa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Claudia Caramanico
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Molfino A, Amabile MI, Imbimbo G, Rizzo V, Pediconi F, Catalano C, Emiliani A, Belli R, Ramaccini C, Parisi C, Nigri G, Muscaritoli M. Association between Growth Differentiation Factor-15 (GDF-15) Serum Levels, Anorexia and Low Muscle Mass among Cancer Patients. Cancers (Basel) 2020; 13:cancers13010099. [PMID: 33396237 PMCID: PMC7795323 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13010099] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2020] [Revised: 12/23/2020] [Accepted: 12/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary In our study, the novel inflammatory cytokine Growth Differentiation Factor-15 (GDF-15) has been found elevated in patients with gastrointestinal and lung cancer and associated with anorexia. Patients with gastrointestinal cancer were found more anorexic (based on the FAACT score) and showed higher GDF-15 serum levels than patients with lung cancer. We also evaluated the muscularity status of the patients by CT scan. No difference was found in GDF-15 levels between cancer patients with low muscle mass vs. those with moderate/high muscularity and between patients with body weight loss vs. those with stable weight. Based on our observations, we confirm the role of GDF-15 in the pathogenesis of anorexia in cancer, although the mechanisms of action of this cytokine in cancer should be further unveiled also regarding its potential involvement in changes in muscularity. Abstract The pathophysiology of cancer anorexia is complex and serum biomarkers, including growth and differentiation factor(s) (GDF), may be modulated. We explored the association(s) between GDF-15 serum levels and anorexia and, secondarily, with low muscle mass and body weight loss in cancer patients. We considered gastrointestinal and lung cancer patients (CP) and healthy BMI-matched controls. The FAACT-questionnaire was administered to diagnose anorexia and we calculated the L3-SMI by CT scan to assess low muscularity, setting their cutoff values at the lowest tertile. GDF-15 serum levels were assessed by ELISA. We enrolled 59 CP and 30 controls; among CP, 25 were affected by gastrointestinal and 34 by lung cancer. Anorexia was present in 36% of CP. Gastrointestinal CP resulted more anorexic compared to lung CP (p = 0.0067). Low muscle mass was present in 33.9% of CP and L3-SMI was lower in gastrointestinal compared to lung CP (p = 0.049). The GDF-15 levels were higher in CP vs. controls (p = 0.00016), as well as in anorexic vs. non-anorexic CP (p = 0.005) and vs. controls (p < 0.0001). Gastrointestinal CP showed higher GDF-15 levels vs. lung CP (p = 0.0004). No difference was found in GDF-15 between CP with low muscle mass and those with moderate/high muscularity and between patients with body weight loss and those with stable weight. Our data support the involvement of GDF-15 in the pathogenesis of cancer anorexia. The mechanisms of action of GDF-15 in cancer should be further clarified also regarding the changes in muscularity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessio Molfino
- Department of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (G.I.); (A.E.); (R.B.); (C.R.); (M.M.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-064-997-2042
| | - Maria Ida Amabile
- Department of Surgical Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy;
| | - Giovanni Imbimbo
- Department of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (G.I.); (A.E.); (R.B.); (C.R.); (M.M.)
| | - Veronica Rizzo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (V.R.); (F.P.); (C.C.)
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (V.R.); (F.P.); (C.C.)
| | - Carlo Catalano
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (V.R.); (F.P.); (C.C.)
| | - Alessandra Emiliani
- Department of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (G.I.); (A.E.); (R.B.); (C.R.); (M.M.)
| | - Roberta Belli
- Department of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (G.I.); (A.E.); (R.B.); (C.R.); (M.M.)
| | - Cesarina Ramaccini
- Department of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (G.I.); (A.E.); (R.B.); (C.R.); (M.M.)
| | - Claudia Parisi
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (C.P.); (G.N.)
| | - Giuseppe Nigri
- Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (C.P.); (G.N.)
| | - Maurizio Muscaritoli
- Department of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Rome, Italy; (G.I.); (A.E.); (R.B.); (C.R.); (M.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Moffa G, Galati F, Collalunga E, Rizzo V, Kripa E, D’Amati G, Pediconi F. Can MRI Biomarkers Predict Triple-Negative Breast Cancer? Diagnostics (Basel) 2020; 10:diagnostics10121090. [PMID: 33333733 PMCID: PMC7765199 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics10121090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2020] [Revised: 12/10/2020] [Accepted: 12/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate MRI features of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) compared with non-TNBC, to predict histopathological results. In the study, 26 patients with TNBC and 24 with non-TNBC who underwent multiparametric MRI of the breast on a 3 T magnet over a 10-months period were retrospectively recruited. MR imaging sets were evaluated by two experienced breast radiologists in consensus and classified according to the 2013 American College of Radiology (ACR) BI-RADS lexicon. The comparison between the two groups was performed using the Chi-square test and followed by logistic regression analyses. We found that 92% of tumors presented as mass enhancements (p = 0.192). 41.7% of TNBC and 86.4% of non-TNBC had irregular shape (p = 0.005); 58.3% of TNBC showed circumscribed margins, compared to 9.1% of non-TNBC masses (p = 0.001); 75% of TNBC and 9.1% of non-TNBC showed rim enhancement (p < 0.001). Intralesional necrosis was significantly associated with TNBC (p = 0.016). Rim enhancement and intralesional necrosis risulted to be positive predictors at univariate analysis (OR = 29.86, and 8.10, respectively) and the multivariate analysis confirmed that rim enhancement is independently associated with TNBC (OR = 33.08). The mean ADC values were significantly higher for TNBC (p = 0.011). In conclusion, TNBC is associated with specific MRI features that can be possible predictors of pathological results, with a consequent prognostic value.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuliana Moffa
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-06-4455602; Fax: +39-06-490243
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
25
|
Moffa G, Galati F, Panzironi G, Rizzo V, Kripa E, Pediconi F. Granular cell tumor of the breast: Tip and tricks on conventional and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2020; 27:178-180. [PMID: 33289271 DOI: 10.1111/tbj.14113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2020] [Revised: 10/30/2020] [Accepted: 11/03/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Giuliana Moffa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Giovanna Panzironi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Veronica Rizzo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Endi Kripa
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza - University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Pediconi F, Galati F, Bernardi D, Belli P, Brancato B, Calabrese M, Camera L, Carbonaro LA, Caumo F, Clauser P, Girardi V, Iacconi C, Martincich L, Panizza P, Petrillo A, Schiaffino S, Tagliafico A, Trimboli RM, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F, Montemezzi S. Breast imaging and cancer diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic: recommendations from the Italian College of Breast Radiologists by SIRM. Radiol Med 2020; 125:926-930. [PMID: 32661780 PMCID: PMC7357257 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-020-01254-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2020] [Accepted: 07/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
The Italian College of Breast Radiologists by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) provides recommendations for breast care provision and procedural prioritization during COVID-19 pandemic, being aware that medical decisions must be currently taken balancing patient's individual and community safety: (1) patients having a scheduled or to-be-scheduled appointment for in-depth diagnostic breast imaging or needle biopsy should confirm the appointment or obtain a new one; (2) patients who have suspicious symptoms of breast cancer (in particular: new onset palpable nodule; skin or nipple retraction; orange peel skin; unilateral secretion from the nipple) should request non-deferrable tests at radiology services; (3) asymptomatic women performing annual mammographic follow-up after breast cancer treatment should preferably schedule the appointment within 1 year and 3 months from the previous check, compatibly with the local organizational conditions; (4) asymptomatic women who have not responded to the invitation for screening mammography after the onset of the pandemic or have been informed of the suspension of the screening activity should schedule the check preferably within 3 months from the date of the not performed check, compatibly with local organizational conditions. The Italian College of Breast Radiologists by SIRM recommends precautions to protect both patients and healthcare workers (radiologists, radiographers, nurses, and reception staff) from infection or disease spread on the occasion of breast imaging procedures, particularly mammography, breast ultrasound, breast magnetic resonance imaging, and breast intervention procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Daniela Bernardi
- Breast Imaging and Screening Unit, Department of Radiology, Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Belli
- Dipartimento Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Beniamino Brancato
- Struttura Complessa di Senologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio la Prevenzione e la Rete Oncologica (ISPRO), Via Cosimo il Vecchio, 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- UOC Senologia Diagnostica, IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy
| | - Lucia Camera
- Department of Pathology and Diagnostics - Radiology Unit, University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Luca A Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Paola Clauser
- Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna/General Hospital Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Veronica Girardi
- Breast Unit Eusoma Certificated, Department of Breast Imaging and Intervention, Istituto clinico S. Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127, Brescia, Italy
| | | | - Laura Martincich
- Unit of Radiodiagnostics, Ospedale Cardinal G. Massaia -ASL AT, Via Conte Verde 125, 14100, Asti, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, Scientific Institute (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Antonella Petrillo
- Radiology Division, "Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione Pascale - IRCCS di Napoli", Naples, Italy
| | - Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Tagliafico
- Department of Health Sciences (DISSAL)- Radiology Section, University of Genova, Via L.B. Alberti 2, 16132, Genoa, Italy
- IRCCS - Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Largo Rosanna Benzi. 10, 16132, Genoa, Italy
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, University of Udine, Piazzale S. M. della Misericordia 15, 33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- Department of Pathology and Diagnostics - Radiology Unit, University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Cantisani V, David E, Barr RG, Radzina M, de Soccio V, Elia D, De Felice C, Pediconi F, Gigli S, Occhiato R, Messineo D, Fresilli D, Ballesio L, D'Ambrosio F. US-Elastography for Breast Lesion Characterization: Prospective Comparison of US BIRADS, Strain Elastography and Shear wave Elastography. Ultraschall Med 2020. [PMID: 32330993 DOI: 10.1055/a-1134–4937] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/29/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the diagnostic performance of strain elastography (SE) and 2 D shear wave elastography (SWE) and SE/SWE combination in comparison with conventional multiparametric ultrasound (US) with respect to improving BI-RADS classification results and differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions using a qualitative and quantitative assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this prospective study, 130 histologically proven breast masses were evaluated with baseline US, color Doppler ultrasound (CDUS), SE and SWE (Toshiba Aplio 500 with a 7-15 MHz wide-band linear transducer). Each lesion was classified according to the BIRADS lexicon by evaluating the size, the B-mode and color Doppler features, the SE qualitative (point color scale) and SE semi-quantitative (strain ratio) methods, and quantitative SWE. Histological results were compared with BIRADS, strain ratio (SR) and shear wave elastography (SWE) all performed by one investigator blinded to the clinical examination and mammographic results at the time of the US examination. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the diagnostic performance of B-mode US, SE, SWE, and their combination. RESULTS Histological examination revealed 47 benign and 83 malignant breast lesions. The accuracy of SR was statistically significantly higher than SWE (sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 89.2 %, 76.6 % and 0.83 for SR and 72.3 %, 66.0 % and 0.69 for SWE, respectively, p = 0.003) but not higher than B-mode US (B-mode US sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 85.5 %, 78.8 %, 0.821, respectively, p = 1.000). CONCLUSION Our experience suggests that conventional US in combination with both SE and SWE is a valid tool that can be useful in the clinical setting, can improve BIRADS category assessment and may help in the differentiation of benign from malignant breast lesions, with SE having higher accuracy than SWE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vito Cantisani
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Emanuele David
- Radiological Sciences, Radiology Unit, Papardo-Hospital, Messina, Italy, Messina, Italy
| | - Richard G Barr
- Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Youngstown, United States
| | - Maija Radzina
- Radiology Department, Pauls Stradins Clinical University Hospital, Riga Stradins University, Faculty of Medicine, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
| | - Valeria de Soccio
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Daniela Elia
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Carlo De Felice
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | | | - Rossella Occhiato
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Daniela Messineo
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Daniele Fresilli
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Laura Ballesio
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| | - Ferdinando D'Ambrosio
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Affiliation(s)
- Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Bick U, Trimboli RM, Athanasiou A, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PAT, Bernathova M, Borbély K, Brkljacic B, Carbonaro LA, Clauser P, Cassano E, Colin C, Esen G, Evans A, Fallenberg EM, Fuchsjaeger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Herranz M, Kinkel K, Kilburn-Toppin F, Kuhl CK, Lesaru M, Lobbes MBI, Mann RM, Martincich L, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Schiaffino S, Sella T, Thomassin-Naggara I, Tardivon A, Ongeval CV, Wallis MG, Zackrisson S, Forrai G, Herrero JC, Sardanelli F. Image-guided breast biopsy and localisation: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging 2020; 11:12. [PMID: 32025985 PMCID: PMC7002629 DOI: 10.1186/s13244-019-0803-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2019] [Accepted: 10/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
We summarise here the information to be provided to women and referring physicians about percutaneous breast biopsy and lesion localisation under imaging guidance. After explaining why a preoperative diagnosis with a percutaneous biopsy is preferred to surgical biopsy, we illustrate the criteria used by radiologists for choosing the most appropriate combination of device type for sampling and imaging technique for guidance. Then, we describe the commonly used devices, from fine-needle sampling to tissue biopsy with larger needles, namely core needle biopsy and vacuum-assisted biopsy, and how mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging work for targeting the lesion for sampling or localisation. The differences among the techniques available for localisation (carbon marking, metallic wire, radiotracer injection, radioactive seed, and magnetic seed localisation) are illustrated. Type and rate of possible complications are described and the issue of concomitant antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy is also addressed. The importance of pathological-radiological correlation is highlighted: when evaluating the results of any needle sampling, the radiologist must check the concordance between the cytology/pathology report of the sample and the radiological appearance of the biopsied lesion. We recommend that special attention is paid to a proper and tactful approach when communicating to the woman the need for tissue sampling as well as the possibility of cancer diagnosis, repeat tissue sampling, and or even surgery when tissue sampling shows a lesion with uncertain malignant potential (also referred to as "high-risk" or B3 lesions). Finally, seven frequently asked questions are answered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- PhD Course in Integrative Biomedical Research, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli, 31, 20133, Milan, Italy
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94800, Villejuif, France
| | - Pascal A T Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Maria Bernathova
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Boris Brkljacic
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Dubrava, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Luca A Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Breast Imaging Division, European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Femme Mère Enfant, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69 677, Bron Cedex, France
| | - Gul Esen
- School of Medicine, Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Tom McDonald Avenue, Dundee, UK
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Diagnostic and Interventional Breast Imaging, Department of Radiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | - Michael H Fuchsjaeger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | | | - Michel Herranz
- CyclotronUnit, GALARIA-SERGAS, Nuclear Medicine Department and Molecular ImagingGroup, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria (IDIS), Santiago de Compostela, Spain
| | - Karen Kinkel
- Institut de Radiologie, Clinique des Grangettes, Chemin des Grangettes 7, 1224 Chêne-Bougeries, Genève, Switzerland
| | - Fleur Kilburn-Toppin
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| | - Mihai Lesaru
- Radiology and Imaging Laboratory, Fundeni Institute, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Marc B I Lobbes
- Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Center, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, PO Box 5500, 6130 MB, Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Laura Martincich
- Unit of Radiodiagnostics ASL AT, Via Conte Verde 125, 14100, Asti, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, Scientific Institute (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina, 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria.,Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy
| | - Tamar Sella
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
| | - Isabelle Thomassin-Naggara
- Department of Radiology, Sorbonne Université, APHP, Hôpital Tenon, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France
| | - Anne Tardivon
- Department of Radiology, Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Chantal Van Ongeval
- Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Matthew G Wallis
- Cambridge Breast Unit and NIHR Biomedical Research Unit, Box 97, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Cavallo Marincola B, Telesca M, Zaccagna F, Riemer F, Anzidei M, Catalano C, Pediconi F. Can unenhanced MRI of the breast replace contrast-enhanced MRI in assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy? Acta Radiol 2019; 60:35-44. [PMID: 29742918 DOI: 10.1177/0284185118773512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The goals of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) are to reduce tumor volume and to offer a prognostic indicator in assessing treatment response. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) is an established method for evaluating response to NAC in patients with breast cancer. PURPOSE To validate the role of unenhanced MRI (ue-MRI) compared to CE-MRI for assessing response to NAC in women with breast cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS Seventy-one patients with ongoing NAC for breast cancer underwent MRI before, during, and at the end of NAC. Ue-MRI was performed with T2-weighted sequences with iterative decomposition of water and fat and diffusion-weighted sequences. CE-MRI was performed using three-dimensional T1-weighted sequences before and after administration of gadobenate dimeglumine. Two blinded observers rated ue-MRI and CE-MRI for the evaluation of tumor response. Statistical analysis was performed to compare lesion size and ADC values changes during therapy, as well as inter-observer agreement. RESULTS There were no statistically significant differences between ue-MRI and CE-MRI sequences for evaluation of lesion size at baseline and after every cycle of treatment ( P > 0.05). The mean tumor ADC values at baseline and across the cycles of NAC were significantly different for the responder group. CONCLUSION Ue-MRI can achieve similar results to CE-MRI for the assessment of tumor response to NAC. ADC values can differentiate responders from non-responders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beatrice Cavallo Marincola
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Marianna Telesca
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Fulvio Zaccagna
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK
| | - Frank Riemer
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK
| | - Michele Anzidei
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Carlo Catalano
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Di Leo G, Ioan I, Luciani ML, Midulla C, Podo F, Sardanelli F, Pediconi F. Changes in total choline concentration in the breast of healthy fertile young women in relation to menstrual cycle or use of oral contraceptives: a 3-T 1H-MRS study. Eur Radiol Exp 2018; 2:43. [PMID: 30560497 PMCID: PMC6297122 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-018-0075-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2018] [Accepted: 10/26/2018] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background To evaluate changes in total choline (tCho) absolute concentration ([tCho]) in the breast of healthy fertile women in relation to menstrual cycle (MC) or use of oral contraceptives (OC). Methods After institutional review board approval, we prospectively evaluated 40 healthy fertile volunteers: 20 with physiological MC, aged 28 ± 3 years (mean ± standard deviation; nOC group); 20 using OC, aged 26 ± 3 years (OC group). Hormonal assays and water-suppressed single-voxel 3-T proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) were performed on MC days 7, 14, and 21 in the nOC group and only on MC day 14 in the OC group. [tCho] was measured versus an external phantom. Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman coefficient were used; data are given as median and interquartile interval. Results All spectra had good quality. In the nOC group, [tCho] (mM) did not change significantly during MC: 0.8 (0.3–2.4) on day 7, 0.9 (0.4–1.2) on day 14, and 0.4 (0.2–0.8) on day 21 (p = 0.963). In the OC group, [tCho] was 0.7 (0.2–1.7) mM. The between-groups difference was not significant on all days (p ≥ 0.411). All hormones except prolactin changed during MC (p ≤ 0.024). In the OC group, [tCho] showed a borderline correlation with estradiol (r = 0.458, p = 0.056), but no correlation with other hormones (p ≥ 0.128). In the nOC group, [tCho] negatively correlated with prolactin (r = -0.587, p = 0.006) on day 7; positive correlation was found with estradiol on day 14 (r = 0.679, p = 0.001). Conclusions A tCho peak can be detected in the normal mammary gland using 3-T 1H-MRS. The [tCho] in healthy volunteers was 0.4–0.9 mM, constant over the MC and independent of OC use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giovanni Di Leo
- Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy.
| | - Ileana Ioan
- Postgraduate School in Radiodiagnostics, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Maria Laura Luciani
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Cecilia Midulla
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Franca Podo
- Department of Cell Biology and Neurosciences, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese, Italy.,Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, San Donato Milanese, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Abstract
Over 80% of females experience nipple discharge during their life. Differently from lactational (milk production) and physiological (white, green, or yellow), which are usually bilateral and involving multiple ducts, pathologic nipple discharge (PND) is a spontaneous commonly single-duct and unilateral, clear, serous, or bloody secretion. Mostly caused by intraductal papilloma(s) or ductal ectasia, in 5-33% of cases is due to an underlying malignancy. After clinical history and physical examination, mammography is the first step after 39, but its sensitivity is low (7-26%). Ultrasound shows higher sensitivity (63-100%). Nipple discharge cytology is limited by a false negative rate over 50%. Galactography is an invasive technique that may cause discomfort and pain; it can be performed only when the duct discharge is demonstrated at the time of the study, with incomplete/failed examination rate up to 15% and a difficult differentiation between malignant and benign lesions. Ductoscopy, performed under local anesthesia in outpatients, provides a direct visualization of intraductal lesions, allowing for directed excision and facilitating a targeted surgery. Its sensitivity reaches 94%; however, it is available in only few centers and most clinicians are unfamiliar with its use. PND has recently emerged as a new indication for contrast-enhanced breast MRI, showing sensitivity superior to galactography, with an overall sensitivity up to 96%, also allowing tailored surgery. Surgery no longer can be considered the standard approach to PND. We propose a state-of-the art flowchart for the management of nipple discharge, including ductoscopy and breast MRI as best options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giovanna Panzironi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Pediconi F, Marzocca F, Cavallo Marincola B, Napoli A. MRI-guided treatment in the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018; 48:1479-1488. [DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2018] [Revised: 07/19/2018] [Accepted: 07/19/2018] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological; Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome, “Sapienza,”; Rome Italy
| | - Flaminia Marzocca
- Department of Radiological; Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome, “Sapienza,”; Rome Italy
| | - Beatrice Cavallo Marincola
- Department of Radiological; Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome, “Sapienza,”; Rome Italy
| | - Alessandro Napoli
- Department of Radiological; Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome, “Sapienza,”; Rome Italy
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Evans A, Trimboli RM, Athanasiou A, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA, Bick U, Camps Herrero J, Clauser P, Colin C, Cornford E, Fallenberg EM, Fuchsjaeger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Kinkel K, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Kuhl CK, Mann RM, Martincich L, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Pijnappel RM, Pinker K, Zackrisson S, Forrai G, Sardanelli F. Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging 2018; 9:449-461. [PMID: 30094592 PMCID: PMC6108964 DOI: 10.1007/s13244-018-0636-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2018] [Revised: 04/28/2018] [Accepted: 05/14/2018] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
This article summarises the information that should be provided to women and referring physicians about breast ultrasound (US). After explaining the physical principles, technical procedure and safety of US, information is given about its ability to make a correct diagnosis, depending on the setting in which it is applied. The following definite indications for breast US in female subjects are proposed: palpable lump; axillary adenopathy; first diagnostic approach for clinical abnormalities under 40 and in pregnant or lactating women; suspicious abnormalities at mammography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); suspicious nipple discharge; recent nipple inversion; skin retraction; breast inflammation; abnormalities in the area of the surgical scar after breast conserving surgery or mastectomy; abnormalities in the presence of breast implants; screening high-risk women, especially when MRI is not performed; loco-regional staging of a known breast cancer, when MRI is not performed; guidance for percutaneous interventions (needle biopsy, pre-surgical localisation, fluid collection drainage); monitoring patients with breast cancer receiving neo-adjuvant therapy, when MRI is not performed. Possible indications such as supplemental screening after mammography for women aged 40-74 with dense breasts are also listed. Moreover, inappropriate indications include screening for breast cancer as a stand-alone alternative to mammography. The structure and organisation of the breast US report and of classification systems such as the BI-RADS and consequent management recommendations are illustrated. Information about additional or new US technologies (colour-Doppler, elastography, and automated whole breast US) is also provided. Finally, five frequently asked questions are answered. TEACHING POINTS • US is an established tool for suspected cancers at all ages and also the method of choice under 40. • For US-visible suspicious lesions, US-guided biopsy is preferred, even for palpable findings. • High-risk women can be screened with US, especially when MRI cannot be performed. • Supplemental US increases cancer detection but also false positives, biopsy rate and follow-up exams. • Breast US is inappropriate as a stand-alone screening method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Tom McDonald Avenue, Dundee, UK
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- PhD Course in Integrative Biomedical Research, Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli, 31, 20133, Milan, Italy
| | - Alexandra Athanasiou
- Breast Imaging Department, MITERA Hospital, 6, Erithrou Stavrou Str. 151 23 Marousi, Athens, Greece
| | - Corinne Balleyguier
- Department of Radiology, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94800, Villejuif, France
| | - Pascal A Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Julia Camps Herrero
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital of La Ribera, Carretera de Corbera, Km 1, 46600, Alzira, Valencia, Spain
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Femme Mère Enfant, 59 Boulevard Pinel, 69 677, Bron Cedex, France
| | - Eleanor Cornford
- Thirlestaine Breast Centre, Cheltenham General Hospital, Thirlestaine Road, Cheltenham, GL53 7AP, UK
| | - Eva M Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Michael H Fuchsjaeger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria
| | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Hills road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
| | - Karen Kinkel
- Institut de Radiologie, Clinique des Grangettes, Chemin des Grangettes 7, 1224, Chêne-Bougeries, Genève, Switzerland
| | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Laura Martincich
- Unità Operativa Radiodiagnostica, Candiolo Cancer Institute - FPO, IRCCS, Str. Prov. 142, km 3.95, 10060, Candiolo, Turin, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Breast Imaging Unit, Scientific Institute (IRCCS) Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina, 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University, Viale Regina Elena, 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Austria
- Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Sophia Zackrisson
- Diagnostic Radiology, Department of Translational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, SE-205 02, Malmö, Sweden
| | - Gabor Forrai
- Department of Radiology, Duna Medical Center, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Verma G, Luciani ML, Palombo A, Metaxa L, Panzironi G, Pediconi F, Giuliani A, Bizzarri M, Todde V. Microcalcification morphological descriptors and parenchyma fractal dimension hierarchically interact in breast cancer: A diagnostic perspective. Comput Biol Med 2018; 93:1-6. [DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2017.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2017] [Revised: 12/09/2017] [Accepted: 12/09/2017] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
|
36
|
Bernardi D, Belli P, Benelli E, Brancato B, Bucchi L, Calabrese M, Carbonaro LA, Caumo F, Cavallo-Marincola B, Clauser P, Fedato C, Frigerio A, Galli V, Giordano L, Giorgi Rossi P, Golinelli P, Morrone D, Mariscotti G, Martincich L, Montemezzi S, Naldoni C, Paduos A, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Querci F, Rizzo A, Saguatti G, Tagliafico A, Trimboli RM, Zappa M, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): recommendations from the Italian College of Breast Radiologists (ICBR) by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) and the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa). Radiol Med 2017; 122:723-730. [PMID: 28540564 PMCID: PMC5596055 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-017-0769-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/24/2017] [Accepted: 04/12/2017] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
This position paper, issued by ICBR/SIRM and GISMa, summarizes the evidence on DBT and provides recommendations for its use. In the screening setting, DBT in adjunct to digital mammography (DM) increased detection rate by 0.5-2.7‰ and decreased false positives by 0.8-3.6% compared to DM alone in observational and double-testing experimental studies. The reduction in recall rate could be less prominent in those screening programs which already have low recall rates with DM. The increase in radiation exposure associated with DM/DBT protocols has been solved by the introduction of synthetic mammograms (sDM) reconstructed from DBT datasets. Thus, whenever possible, sDM/DBT should be preferred to DM/DBT. However, before introducing DBT as a routine screening tool for average-risk women, we should wait for the results of randomized controlled trials and for a statistically significant and clinically relevant reduction in the interval cancer rate, hopefully associated with a reduction in the advanced cancer rate. Otherwise, a potential for overdiagnosis and overtreatment cannot be excluded. Studies exploring this issue are ongoing. Screening of women at intermediate risk should follow the same recommendations, with particular protocols for women with previous BC history. In high-risk women, if mammography is performed as an adjunct to MRI or in the case of MRI contraindications, sDM/DBT protocols are suggested. Evidence exists in favor of DBT usage in women with clinical symptoms/signs and asymptomatic women with screen-detected findings recalled for work-up. The possibility to perform needle biopsy or localization under DBT guidance should be offered when DBT-only findings need characterization or surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Bernardi
- U.O. Senologia Clinica e Screening Mammografico, Dipartimento di Radiologia, APSS, Centro per i Servizi Sanitari, Pal. C, viale Verona, 38123, Trento, Italy
| | - Paolo Belli
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy
| | - Eva Benelli
- Zadig Scientific Communication Agency, Via Arezzo 21, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Beniamino Brancato
- Struttura Complessa di Senologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica (ISPO), Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Lauro Bucchi
- Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (IRST) IRCCS, Via Piero Maroncelli 40, Meldola, 47014, Forlì, Italy
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- UOC Senologia Diagnostica, IRCCS AOU San Martino-IST, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, Italy
| | - Luca A Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesca Caumo
- UOSD Breast Unit ULSS 20, Piazza Lambranzi 1, 37142, Verona, Italy
| | - Beatrice Cavallo-Marincola
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Oncologiche ed Anatomo-patologiche, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza Università di Roma, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna/General Hospital Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Chiara Fedato
- Regional Screening Coordinating Centre, Veneto Region, Venice, Italy
| | - Alfonso Frigerio
- Regional Reference Centre for Breast Cancer Screening, Turin, Italy
| | - Vania Galli
- Mammography Screening Centre, Local Health Authority, Modena, Italy
| | - Livia Giordano
- Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Turin, Italy
| | - Paolo Giorgi Rossi
- Interinstitutional Epidemiology Unit, AUSL Reggio Emilia, and Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Paola Golinelli
- Medical Physics Service, Local Health Authority, Modena, Italy
| | - Doralba Morrone
- Struttura Complessa di Senologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica (ISPO), Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Giovanna Mariscotti
- Radiologia 1U, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Università di Torino, A. O. U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy
| | - Laura Martincich
- U.O. Radiodiagnostica, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO, IRCCS, Strada Provinciale 142, km 3.95, Candiolo, 10060, Turin, Italy
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- DAI Patologia e Diagnostica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, Piazzale A. Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, Italy
| | - Carlo Naldoni
- Department of Health, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy
| | - Adriana Paduos
- Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Turin, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- U.O. Radiologia Senologica, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Oncologiche ed Anatomo-patologiche, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza Università di Roma, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Fiammetta Querci
- Department of Prevention, Screening Centre, Local Health Authority, Sassari, Italy
| | - Antonio Rizzo
- Pathology Department, Local Health Authority, Asolo, Treviso, Italy
| | | | - Alberto Tagliafico
- Department of Experimental Medicine, DIMES, Institute of Anatomy, University of Genova, Via de Toni 14, 16132, Genoa, Italy
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Zappa
- UOC Epidemiologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica (ISPO), Florence, Italy
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, University of Udine, Piazzale S. M. della Misericordia 15, 33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy.
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Ricci P, Maggini E, Mancuso E, Maldur V, Medvedyeva O, Ursu SC, Pediconi F. Elastography in the diagnosis of breast lesions: comparison of different elastographic features. Acta Radiol 2017; 58:1189-1197. [PMID: 28132531 DOI: 10.1177/0284185116687169] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Background Breast elastography is a non-invasive and widely accessible method used in the differential diagnostic procedure in addition to B-mode imaging. Purpose To assess the role of elastographic features in the differentiation of breast lesions and to evaluate the importance of depth in the choice of reference fat tissue for the calculation of strain ratio. Material and Methods From January to August 2015, 242 breast lesions were evaluated using elastographic assessment based on qualitative and semi-quantitative parameters (color map, strain ratio, length ratio) as well as elastographic analysis. Histological findings were considered as gold-standard. Results Sensitivity and specificity of B-mode ultrasound imaging were 90% and 60%, respectively. Color map sensitivity was 98% and specificity 46%; strain ratio sensitivity 81% and specificity 70%; length ratio sensitivity 64% and specificity 76%. Combined analysis of these three elastographic features improved the overall diagnostic performance of any of the three parameters alone, yielded sensitivity similar to that of color map (95%) and specificity comparable to strain ratio and length ratio (70%). There was no significant difference in strain ratio obtained from the reference fat tissue at the same depth as the lesion and at a different depth (sensitivity 77% versus 84%; specificity 70% versus 68%; P < 0.001). Conclusion In our experience, elastography can improve ultrasound characterization of the lesion, particularly if elastographic analysis is performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paolo Ricci
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza, Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Elena Maggini
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza, Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Ester Mancuso
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza, Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Viorica Maldur
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza, Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Olena Medvedyeva
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza, Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Simona Carmen Ursu
- Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza, Rome University, Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza, Rome University, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Galati F, Marzocca F, Bassetti E, Luciani ML, Tan S, Catalano C, Pediconi F. Added Value of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Combined with Digital Mammography According to Reader Agreement: Changes in BI-RADS Rate and Follow-Up Management. Breast Care (Basel) 2017; 12:218-222. [PMID: 29070984 DOI: 10.1159/000477537] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to evaluate the added value of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) when combined with digital mammography (DM) in BI-RADS assessment and follow-up management. METHODS From February 2014 to January 2015, 214 patients underwent DM and DBT, acquired with a Siemens Mammomat Inspiration unit. 2 expert readers independently reviewed the studies in 2 steps: DM and DM+DBT, according to BI-RADS rate. Patients with BI-RADS 0, 3, 4, and 5 were recalled for work-up. Inter-reader agreement for BI-RADS rate and work-up rate were evaluated using Cohen's kappa. RESULTS Inter-reader agreement (κ value) for BI-RADS classification was 0.58 for DM and 0.8 for DM+DBT. DM+DBT increased the number of BI-RADS 1, 2, 4, 5 and reduced the number of BI-RADS 0 and 3 for both readers compared to DM alone. Regarding work-up rate agreement, κ was poor for DM and substantial (0.7) for DM+DBT. DM+DBT also reduced the work-up rate for both Reader 1 and Reader 2. CONCLUSION DM+DBT increased the number of negative and benign cases (BI-RADS 1 and 2) and suspicious and malignant cases (BI-RADS 4 and 5), while it reduced the number of BI-RADS 0 and 3. DM+DBT also improved inter-reader agreement and reduced the overall recall for additional imaging or short-interval follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Galati
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome 'Sapienza', Rome, Italy
| | - Flaminia Marzocca
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome 'Sapienza', Rome, Italy
| | - Erica Bassetti
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome 'Sapienza', Rome, Italy
| | - Maria L Luciani
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome 'Sapienza', Rome, Italy
| | - Sharon Tan
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome 'Sapienza', Rome, Italy.,Tengku Ampuan Rahimah Hospital, Klang, Malaysia
| | - Carlo Catalano
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome 'Sapienza', Rome, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences - University of Rome 'Sapienza', Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Bucchi L, Belli P, Benelli E, Bernardi D, Brancato B, Calabrese M, Carbonaro LA, Caumo F, Cavallo-Marincola B, Clauser P, Fedato C, Frigerio A, Galli V, Giordano L, Golinelli P, Mariscotti G, Martincich L, Montemezzi S, Morrone D, Naldoni C, Paduos A, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Querci F, Rizzo A, Saguatti G, Tagliafico A, Trimboli RM, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. Recommendations for breast imaging follow-up of women with a previous history of breast cancer: position paper from the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa) and the Italian College of Breast Radiologists (ICBR) by SIRM. Radiol Med 2016; 121:891-896. [PMID: 27601142 PMCID: PMC5102938 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-016-0676-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2016] [Accepted: 08/16/2016] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
Women who were previously treated for breast cancer (BC) are an important particular subgroup of women at intermediate BC risk. Their breast follow-up should be planned taking in consideration a 1.0-1.5 % annual rate of loco-regional recurrences and new ipsilateral or contralateral BCs during 15-20 years, and be based on a regional/district invitation system. This activity should be carried out by a Department of Radiology integrating screening and diagnostics in the context of a Breast Unit. We recommend the adoption of protocols dedicated to women previously treated for BC, with a clear definition of responsibilities, methods for invitation, site(s) of visits, methods for clinical and radiological evaluation, follow-up duration, role and function of family doctors and specialists. These women will be invited to get a mammogram in dedicated sessions starting from the year after the end of treatment. The planned follow-up duration will be at least 10 years and will be defined on the basis of patient's age and preferences, taking into consideration organizational matters. Special agreements can be defined in the case of women who have their follow-up planned at other qualified centers. Dedicated screening sessions should include: evaluation of familial/personal history (if previously not done) for identifying high-risk conditions which could indicate a different screening strategy; immediate evaluation of mammograms by one or, when possible, two breast radiologists with possible addition of supplemental mammographic views, digital breast tomosynthesis, clinical breast examination, breast ultrasound; and prompt planning of possible further workup. Results of these screening sessions should be set apart from those of general female population screening and presented in dedicated reports. The following research issues are suggested: further risk stratification and effectiveness of follow-up protocols differentiated also for BC pathologic subtype and molecular classification, and evaluation of different models of survivorship care, also in terms of cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauro Bucchi
- Romagna Cancer Registry, Romagna Cancer Institute (IRST) IRCCS, via Piero Maroncelli, 40, 47014, Meldola, Forlì, Italy
| | - Paolo Belli
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Agostino Gemelli, 8, 0168, Rome, Italy
| | - Eva Benelli
- Zadig Scientific Communication Agency, via Arezzo 21, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Daniela Bernardi
- Dipartimento di Radiologia, U.O. Senologia Clinica e Screening Mammografico, APSS, Centro per i Servizi Sanitari, Pal. C, viale Verona, 38123, Trento, Italy
| | - Beniamino Brancato
- Struttura Complessa di Senologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica (ISPO), Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Massimo Calabrese
- UOC Senologia Diagnostica, IRCCS AOU San Martino-IST, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genoa, Italy
| | - Luca A Carbonaro
- Unit of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesca Caumo
- UOSD Breast Unit ULSS20, Piazza Lambranzi 1, 37142, Verona, Italy
| | - Beatrice Cavallo-Marincola
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Oncologiche ed Anatomo-patologiche, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza Università di Roma, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Paola Clauser
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna/General Hospital Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Verona, Austria.,Institute of Radiology, University of Udine, P.le S. M. della Misericordia 15, 33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Chiara Fedato
- Regional Screening Coordinating Centre, Veneto Region, Venice, Italy
| | - Alfonso Frigerio
- Regional Reference Centre for Breast Cancer Screening, Turin, Italy
| | - Vania Galli
- Mammography Screening Centre, Local Health Authority, Modena, Italy
| | - Livia Giordano
- Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Turin, Italy
| | - Paola Golinelli
- Medical Physics Service, Local Health Authority, Modena, Italy
| | - Giovanna Mariscotti
- Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radiologia 1U, Università di Torino, A. O. U. Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Via Genova 3, 10126, Turin, Italy
| | - Laura Martincich
- U.O. Radiodiagnostica, Candiolo Cancer Institute-FPO, IRCCS, Str. Prov. 142, km 3.95, I, 10060, Candiolo, Turin, Italy
| | - Stefania Montemezzi
- DAI Patologia e Diagnostica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata, P.le A. Stefani 1, 37126, Verona, Italy
| | - Doralba Morrone
- Struttura Complessa di Senologia Clinica, Istituto per lo Studio e la Prevenzione Oncologica (ISPO), Via Cosimo il Vecchio 2, 50139, Florence, Italy
| | - Carlo Naldoni
- Department of Health, Emilia-Romagna Region, Bologna, Italy
| | - Adriana Paduos
- Epidemiology Unit, Centre for Cancer Prevention, Turin, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- U.O. Radiologia Senologica, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Pediconi
- Dipartimento di Scienze Radiologiche, Oncologiche ed Anatomo-patologiche, Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza Università di Roma, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy
| | - Fiammetta Querci
- Department of Prevention, Screening Centre, Local Health Authority, Sassari, Italy
| | - Antonio Rizzo
- Pathology Department, Local Health Authority, Asolo, Italy
| | | | - Alberto Tagliafico
- Department of Experimental Medicine, DIMES, Institute of Anatomy, University of Genova, Via de Toni 14, 16132, Genoa, Italy
| | - Rubina M Trimboli
- Unit of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy
| | - Chiara Zuiani
- Institute of Radiology, University of Udine, P.le S. M. della Misericordia 15, 33100, Udine, Italy
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Unit of Radiology, Research Hospital (IRCCS) Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, San Donato Milanese, 20097, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Mariscotti G, Belli P, Bernardi D, Brancato B, Calabrese M, Carbonaro LA, Cavallo-Marincola B, Caumo F, Clauser P, Martinchich L, Montemezzi S, Panizza P, Pediconi F, Tagliafico A, Trimboli RM, Zuiani C, Sardanelli F. Mammography and MRI for screening women who underwent chest radiation therapy (lymphoma survivors): recommendations for surveillance from the Italian College of Breast Radiologists by SIRM. Radiol Med 2016; 121:834-837. [DOI: 10.1007/s11547-016-0667-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2016] [Accepted: 06/22/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
41
|
Mann RM, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA, Bick U, Colin C, Cornford E, Evans A, Fallenberg E, Forrai G, Fuchsjäger MH, Gilbert FJ, Helbich TH, Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Camps-Herrero J, Kuhl CK, Martincich L, Pediconi F, Panizza P, Pina LJ, Pijnappel RM, Pinker-Domenig K, Skaane P, Sardanelli F. Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women's information. Eur Radiol 2015; 25:3669-78. [PMID: 26002130 PMCID: PMC4636525 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3807-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 272] [Impact Index Per Article: 30.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2015] [Revised: 02/28/2015] [Accepted: 04/15/2015] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED This paper summarizes information about breast MRI to be provided to women and referring physicians. After listing contraindications, procedure details are described, stressing the need for correct scheduling and not moving during the examination. The structured report including BI-RADS® categories and further actions after a breast MRI examination are discussed. Breast MRI is a very sensitive modality, significantly improving screening in high-risk women. It also has a role in clinical diagnosis, problem solving, and staging, impacting on patient management. However, it is not a perfect test, and occasionally breast cancers can be missed. Therefore, clinical and other imaging findings (from mammography/ultrasound) should also be considered. Conversely, MRI may detect lesions not visible on other imaging modalities turning out to be benign (false positives). These risks should be discussed with women before a breast MRI is requested/performed. Because breast MRI drawbacks depend upon the indication for the examination, basic information for the most important breast MRI indications is presented. Seventeen notes and five frequently asked questions formulated for use as direct communication to women are provided. The text was reviewed by Europa Donna-The European Breast Cancer Coalition to ensure that it can be easily understood by women undergoing MRI. KEY POINTS • Information on breast MRI concerns advantages/disadvantages and preparation to the examination • Claustrophobia, implantable devices, allergic predisposition, and renal function should be checked • Before menopause, scheduling on day 7-14 of the cycle is preferred • During the examination, it is highly important that the patient keeps still • Availability of prior examinations improves accuracy of breast MRI interpretation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Pascal A Baltzer
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ulrich Bick
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Catherine Colin
- Radiology Unit, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Lyon Sud, Pierre Bénite Cedex, France
| | - Eleanor Cornford
- Nottingham Breast Institute, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
| | - Andrew Evans
- Dundee Cancer Centre, Clinical Research Centre, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK
| | - Eva Fallenberg
- Clinic of Radiology, Charité, Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Gabor Forrai
- MHEK Teaching Hospital University Semmelweis, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | - Fiona J Gilbert
- Department of Radiology, University of Cambridge, School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK
| | - Thomas H Helbich
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | | | - Christiane K Kuhl
- University Hospital of Aachen, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Aachen, Germany
| | | | - Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Pietro Panizza
- Department of Radiology 1, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Luis J Pina
- Department of Radiology, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
| | - Ruud M Pijnappel
- Department of Imaging, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Katja Pinker-Domenig
- Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Per Skaane
- Department of Radiology, Oslo University Hospital Ullevaal, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Sorano V, Telesca M, Pediconi F, Bova D, Guidetti F. Intact intracranial breast prosthesis: a 28-year CT follow-up after treatment of late hemispherectomy complications. Childs Nerv Syst 2015; 31:311-5. [PMID: 25487771 PMCID: PMC4305371 DOI: 10.1007/s00381-014-2602-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2014] [Accepted: 11/24/2014] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Anatomical hemispherectomy has had excellent results in treating drug-resistant seizures of infantile hemiplegia. This technique of hemispherectomy consists in the removal of a whole hemisphere, with or without the basal ganglia, the end result being a large cavity left at the end of the operation. The technique, however, is considered to be weighted by important complications, in particular intracranial hemorrhages due to vessels tearing secondary to dislodgement of the remaining hemisphere. Several techniques have been consequently proposed to reduce the volume of the residual hemicranial cavity. An alternative measure is the filling of the cavity itself. We have demonstrated that this type of procedure can be carried out using a silicone breast prosthesis. In this report, we demonstrate also that such an implant can have a surprisingly long duration in its unusual location.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- V. Sorano
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, University of Rome “Sapienza”, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - M. Telesca
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, University of Rome “Sapienza”, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - F. Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, University of Rome “Sapienza”, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Rome, Italy
| | - D. Bova
- Department of Radiology, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL 60153 USA
| | - F. Guidetti
- Ostia Radiologica, C.so Duca di Genova, 26, Ostia Lido, 00121 Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Cavallo Marincola B, Pediconi F, Anzidei M, Miglio E, Di Mare L, Telesca M, Mancini M, D’Amati G, Monti M, Catalano C, Napoli A. High-intensity focused ultrasound in breast pathology: non-invasive treatment of benign and malignant lesions. Expert Rev Med Devices 2014; 12:191-9. [DOI: 10.1586/17434440.2015.986096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
|
44
|
Marincola B, Napoli A, Pediconi F, Di Mare L, Palla C, Telesca M, Miglio E, Amabile M, Marangi G, d’Amati G, Monti M, Catalano C. Initial clinical experience of non-invasive treatment of Magnetic Resonance guided high intensity focused Ultrasound (MRgFUS) for focal breast cancer. J Ther Ultrasound 2014. [PMCID: PMC4292023 DOI: 10.1186/2050-5736-2-s1-a16] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
|
45
|
Panizza P, Viganò S, Bonelli L, Bazzocchi M, Belli P, Calabrese M, Caramella D, Corcione S, Del Maschio A, Martincich L, Montemezzi S, Pediconi F, Petrillo A, Sardanelli F, Bruzzi P. Screening women at intermediate risk: harm or charm? Eur J Radiol 2013; 81 Suppl 1:S116-7. [PMID: 23083554 DOI: 10.1016/s0720-048x(12)70048-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Pietro Panizza
- Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Pediconi F, Kubik-Huch R, Chilla B, Schwenke C, Kinkel K. Erratum to: Intra-individual randomised comparison of gadobutrol 1.0 M versus gadobenate dimeglumine 0.5 M in patients scheduled for preoperative breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2013. [DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2908-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
|
47
|
Pediconi F, Vasselli F, Roselli A, Zaccagna F, Di Mare L, Catalano C. Unenhanced MRI at 3T in neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Radiol 2013; 81 Suppl 1:S121-3. [PMID: 23083556 DOI: 10.1016/s0720-048x(12)70050-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Federica Pediconi
- Department of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza, University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Kinkel K, Schwenke C, Kubik-Huch R, Pediconi F. Intra-individual randomised comparison of gadobutrol 1.0 M versus gadobenate dimeglumine 0.5 M in patients scheduled for preoperative breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2013; 23:2097-9. [PMID: 23712434 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2878-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2013] [Accepted: 04/04/2013] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
49
|
|
50
|
Pediconi F, Kubik-Huch R, Chilla B, Schwenke C, Kinkel K. Intra-individual randomised comparison of gadobutrol 1.0 M versus gadobenate dimeglumine 0.5 M in patients scheduled for preoperative breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2012; 23:84-92. [PMID: 22797979 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2557-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2012] [Revised: 05/21/2012] [Accepted: 06/02/2012] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To demonstrate non-inferiority of gadobutrol versus gadobenate dimeglumine by intra-individually comparing 0.1 mmol/kg body weight doses for contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and prospectively evaluating lesion detection and characterisation in a multicentre trial. METHODS Two identical breast MRI examinations were performed in 72 patients with biopsy-proven breast cancer, separated by 1-7 days. Gadobutrol 1.0 M or gadobenate 0.5 M were administered in a randomised order. Lesion detection and characterisation were performed by two independent blinded readers. Lesion tracking, which compared on-site readings and histology from surgery or biopsy, was performed by a third reader. Differences in lesion detection and characterisation were compared between the two contrast agents. RESULTS Among 103 lesions, 96 were malignant and 7 were benign. No difference in lesion detection was identified between the contrast agents (82.33 % for gadobutrol, 81.60 % for gadobenate). Assessment of sensitivity in lesion characterisation and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems showed no difference between gadobutrol (92.63 %) and gadobenate (90.53 %). Regarding morphology, there was more non-focal enhancement for gadobutrol than for gadobenate (P = 0.0057). CONCLUSION Non-inferiority of gadobutrol compared with gadobenate was demonstrated for breast lesion detection and sensitivity in lesion characterisation in breast MRI.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Pediconi
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University La Sapienza, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|