Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs. Abbreviated Breast MRI for Screening Women with Intermediate Risk of Breast Cancer—How Low-Cost Must MRI Be?

Background: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and abbreviated breast MRI (AB-MRI) offer superior diagnostic performance compared to conventional mammography in screening women with intermediate risk of breast cancer due to dense breast tissue. The aim of this model-based economic evaluation was to analyze whether AB-MRI is cost-effective in this cohort compared to DBT. Methods: Decision analysis and Markov simulations were used to model the cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a time horizon of 30 years. Model input parameters were adopted from recent literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were applied to test the stability of the model. Results: In the base-case scenario, the costs of an AB-MRI examination were defined to equal the costs of a full protocol acquisition. Two-yearly screening of women with dense breasts resulted in cumulative discounted costs of $8798 and$9505 for DBT and AB-MRI, and cumulative discounted effects of 19.23 and 19.27 QALYs, respectively, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $20,807 per QALY gained in the base-case scenario. By reducing the cost of an AB-MRI examination below a threshold of$241 in sensitivity analyses, AB-MRI would become cost-saving compared to DBT. Conclusion: In comparison to DBT, AB-MRI can be considered cost-effective up to a price per examination of $593 in screening patients at intermediate risk of breast cancer

Management of atypical lobular hyperplasia, atypical ductal hyperplasia, and lobular carcinoma in situ.

Atypical hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ are rare proliferative breast lesions, growing inside ducts and terminal ducto-lobular units. They represent a marker of increased risk for breast cancer and a non-obligate precursor of malignancy. Evidence available on diagnosis and management is scarce. They are frequently found incidentally associated with other lesions, but can be visible through mammography, ultrasound or magnetic resonance. Due to the risk of underestimation, surgical excision is often performed. The analysis of imaging and histopathological characteristics could help identifying low-risk cases, for which surgery is not necessary. Chemopreventive agents can be used for risk reduction. Careful imaging follow up is mandatory; the role of breast MRI as screening modality is under discussio

Density and tailored breast cancer screening: practice and prediction an overview

Mammography, as the primary screening modality, has facilitated a substantial decrease in breast cancer-related mortality in the general population. However, the sensitivity of mammography for breast cancer detection is decreased in women with higher breast densities, which is an independent risk factor for breast cancer. With increasing public awareness of the implications of a high breast density, there is an increasing demand for supplemental screening in these patients. Yet, improvements in breast cancer detection with supplemental screening methods come at the expense of increased false-positives, recall rates, patient anxiety, and costs. Therefore, breast cancer screening practice must change from a general one-size-fits-all approach to a more personalized, risk-based one that is tailored to the individual womans risk, personal beliefs, and preferences, while accounting for cost, potential harm, and benefits. This overview will provide an overview of the available breast density assessment modalities, the current breast density screening recommendations for women at average risk of breast cancer, and supplemental methods for breast cancer screening. In addition, we will provide a look at the possibilities for a risk-adapted breast cancer screening.(VLID)479970

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Breast lesion detection and characterization with contrastenhanced magnetic resonance imaging: Prospective randomized intraindividual comparison of gadoterate meglumine (0.15 mmol/kg) and gadobenate dimeglumine (0.075 mmol/kg) at 3T

Background Contrastenhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CEMRI) of the breast is highly sensitive for breast cancer detection. Multichannel coils and 3T scanners can increase signal, spatial, and temporal resolution. In addition, the T1reduction effect of a gadoliniumbased contrast agent (GBCA) is higher at 3T. Thus, it might be possible to reduce the dose of GBCA at 3T without losing diagnostic information. Purpose To compare a threequarter (0.075 mmol/kg) dose of the highrelaxivity GBCA gadobenate dimeglumine, with a 1.5fold higher than onlabel dose (0.15 mmol/kg) of gadoterate meglumine for breast lesion detection and characterization at 3T CEMRI. Study Type Prospective, randomized, intraindividual comparative study. Population Eligible were patients with imaging abnormalities (BIRADS 0, 4, 5) on conventional imaging. Each patient underwent two examinations, 2472 hours apart, one with 0.075 mmol/kg gadobenate and the other with 0.15 mmol/kg gadoterate administered in a randomized order. In all, 109 patients were prospectively recruited. Field Strength/Sequence 3T MRI with a standard breast protocol (dynamicCE, T2wTSE, STIRT2w, DWI). Assessment Histopathology was the standard of reference. Three blinded, offsite breast radiologists evaluated the examinations using the BIRADS lexicon. Statistical Tests Lesion detection, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy were calculated perlesion and perregion, and compared by univariate and multivariate analysis (Generalized Estimating Equations, GEE). Results Five patients were excluded, leaving 104 women with 142 histologically verified breast lesions (109 malignant, 33 benign) available for evaluation. Lesion detection with gadobenate (84.588.7%) was not inferior to gadoterate (84.590.8%) (P 0.165). At perregion analysis, gadobenate demonstrated higher specificity (96.498.7% vs. 92.697.3%, P 0.007) and accuracy (96.397.8% vs. 93.696.1%, P 0.001) compared with gadoterate. Multivariate analysis demonstrated superior, readerindependent diagnostic accuracy with gadobenate (odds ratio = 1.7, P < 0.001 using GEE). Data Conclusion A 0.075 mmol/kg dose of the highrelaxivity contrast agent gadobenate was not inferior to a 0.15 mmol/kg dose of gadoterate for breast lesion detection. Gadobenate allowed increased specificity and accuracy. Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2(VLID)489516

A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on radiologists’ preferences regarding quality assurance measures of image interpretation in screening and diagnostic mammography

Objectives: Quality assurance (QA) of image interpretation plays a key role in screening and diagnostic mammography, maintaining minimum standards and supporting continuous improvement in interpreting images. However, the QA structure across Europe shows considerable variation. The European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) conducted a survey among the members to collect information on radiologists’ preferences regarding QA measures in mammography. Materials and methods: An anonymous online survey consisting of 25 questions was distributed to all EUSOBI members and national breast radiology bodies in Europe. The questions were designed to collect demographic characteristics, information on responders’ mammography workload and data about QA measures currently used in their country. Data was analysed using descriptive statistical analysis, the χ 2 test, linear regression, and Durbin-Watson statistic test. Results: In total, 251 breast radiologists from 34 countries completed the survey. Most respondents were providing both screening and symptomatic services (137/251, 54.6%), working in an academic hospital (85/251, 33.9%) and reading 1000–4999 cases per year (109/251, 43.4%). More than half of them (133/251, 53%) had established QA measures in their workplace. Although less than one-third (71/251, 28.3%) had to participate in regular performance testing, the vast majority (190/251, 75.7%) agreed that a mandatory test would be helpful to improve their skills. Conclusion: QA measures were in place for more than half of the respondents working in screening and diagnostic mammography to evaluate their breast imaging performance. Although there were substantial differences between countries, the importance of having QA in the workplace and implemented was widely acknowledged by radiologists. Clinical relevance statement: Although several quality assurance (QA) measures of image interpretation are recommended by European bodies or national organisations, the QA in mammography is quite heterogenous between countries and reporting settings, and not always actively implemented across Europe. Key Points: The first survey that presents radiologists’ preferences regarding QA measures of image interpretation in mammography. Quality assurance measures in the workplace are better-established for breast screening compared to diagnostic mammography. Radiologists consider that performance tests would help to improve their mammography interpretation skills

A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on radiologists’ preferences regarding quality assurance measures of image interpretation in screening and diagnostic mammography

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank all the breast imaging readers who took the time to answer the survey.Objectives: Quality assurance (QA) of image interpretation plays a key role in screening and diagnostic mammography, maintaining minimum standards and supporting continuous improvement in interpreting images. However, the QA structure across Europe shows considerable variation. The European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) conducted a survey among the members to collect information on radiologists’ preferences regarding QA measures in mammography. Materials and methods: An anonymous online survey consisting of 25 questions was distributed to all EUSOBI members and national breast radiology bodies in Europe. The questions were designed to collect demographic characteristics, information on responders’ mammography workload and data about QA measures currently used in their country. Data was analysed using descriptive statistical analysis, the χ2 test, linear regression, and Durbin-Watson statistic test. Results: In total, 251 breast radiologists from 34 countries completed the survey. Most respondents were providing both screening and symptomatic services (137/251, 54.6%), working in an academic hospital (85/251, 33.9%) and reading 1000–4999 cases per year (109/251, 43.4%). More than half of them (133/251, 53%) had established QA measures in their workplace. Although less than one-third (71/251, 28.3%) had to participate in regular performance testing, the vast majority (190/251, 75.7%) agreed that a mandatory test would be helpful to improve their skills. Conclusion: QA measures were in place for more than half of the respondents working in screening and diagnostic mammography to evaluate their breast imaging performance. Although there were substantial differences between countries, the importance of having QA in the workplace and implemented was widely acknowledged by radiologists. Clinical relevance statement: Although several quality assurance (QA) measures of image interpretation are recommended by European bodies or national organisations, the QA in mammography is quite heterogenous between countries and reporting settings, and not always actively implemented across Europe. Key Points: The first survey that presents radiologists’ preferences regarding QA measures of image interpretation in mammography. Quality assurance measures in the workplace are better-established for breast screening compared to diagnostic mammography. Radiologists consider that performance tests would help to improve their mammography interpretation skills

Risk factors for residual fibroglandular breast tissue following a mastectomy - an overview and retrospective cohort study

Abstract Background Residual fibroglandular breast tissue (RFGT) following a mastectomy is associated with the remaining of occult breast cancer at the time of mastectomy as well as an increased local recurrence risk thereafter. Despite its oncologic implications, data on measures to prevent RFGT are lacking. Therefore, in a first step knowledge of risk factors for RFGT is of uttermost importance in order to allow identification of patients at risk and subsequently adaption of the surgical treatment and potentially prevention of RFGT a priori. Methods We performed a systematic literature review in PubMed using the MESH terms [residual fibroglandular breast tissue], [residual breast tissue], [mastectomy] and [risk factor] followed by a retrospective data analysis including all patients with a mastectomy treated at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Medical University of Vienna, Austria, between 01.01.2015 and 26.02.2020 in order to identify risk factors of RFGT following a mastectomy. The primary aim of the study was to assess a potential difference in RFGT volume between the different types of mastectomy. The secondary objectives of the study were to identify other potential risk factors for RFGT as well as to compare the skin and subcutaneous fat tissue thickness pre- to postoperatively. Results Significantly higher RFGT volumes were observed following a nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) compared to a skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and radical mastectomy (RME) (p < .001). Furthermore, RFGT volume was significantly associated with the variables: reconstruction (p = .012), acellular dermal matrix (ADM) or mesh (p = .031), patient age (p = .022), preoperative fibroglandular tissue (FGT) volume (p = .012) and preoperative whole breast volume (including the skin envelope and nipple-areola-complex) (p = .030). The reduction in the postoperative compared to preoperative skin envelope thickness measured medially and laterally reached statistical significance in the NSM-cohort (medial p < .001, lateral p = .001) and showed a numerical difference in the RME and SSM-cohort. Conclusion Mastectomy type, reconstruction, ADM or mesh, patient age, preoperative FGT volume and whole breast volume were identified as risk factors for RFGT in univariable analysis. The observed reduction in the post- compared to preoperative skin envelope thickness should be avoided considering the known associated increase in risk for ischemic complications

Current use and future perspectives of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM): a survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI)

Objectives: To perform a survey among members of the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) regarding the use of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM). Methods: A panel of nine board-certified radiologists developed a 29-item online questionnaire, distributed to all EUSOBI members (inside and outside Europe) from January 25 to March 10, 2023. CEM implementation, examination protocols, reporting strategies, and current and future CEM indications were investigated. Replies were exploratively analyzed with descriptive and non-parametric statistics. Results: Among 434 respondents (74.9% from Europe), 50% (217/434) declared to use CEM, 155/217 (71.4%) seeing less than 200 CEMs per year. CEM use was associated with academic settings and high breast imaging workload (p < 0.001). The lack of CEM adoption was most commonly due to the perceived absence of a clinical need (65.0%) and the lack of resources to acquire CEM-capable systems (37.3%). CEM protocols varied widely, but most respondents (61.3%) had already adopted the 2022 ACR CEM BI-RADS® lexicon. CEM use in patients with contraindications to MRI was the most common current indication (80.6%), followed by preoperative staging (68.7%). Patients with MRI contraindications also represented the most commonly foreseen CEM indication (88.0%), followed by the work-up of inconclusive findings at non-contrast examinations (61.5%) and supplemental imaging in dense breasts (53.0%). Respondents declaring CEM use and higher CEM experience gave significantly more current (p = 0.004) and future indications (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Despite a trend towards academic high-workload settings and its prevalent use in patients with MRI contraindications, CEM use and progressive experience were associated with increased confidence in the technique. Clinical relevance statement: In this first survey on contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) use and perspectives among the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) members, the perceived absence of a clinical need chiefly drove the 50% CEM adoption rate. CEM adoption and progressive experience were associated with more extended current and future indications. Key Points: • Among the 434 members of the European Society of Breast Imaging who completed this survey, 50% declared to use contrast-enhanced mammography in clinical practice. • Due to the perceived absence of a clinical need, contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is still prevalently used as a replacement for MRI in patients with MRI contraindications. • The number of current and future CEM indications marked by respondents was associated with their degree of CEM experience