Do We Need Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials to Evaluate the Clinical Impact of Breast MR Imaging?

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 403-409

  Hillman, Bruce J ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^b AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LUNG CANCER; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ONCOGENE; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REVIEW; SCREENING;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, INTERVENTIONAL; MASS SCREENING; NEOPLASM STAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 33845978023     PISSN: 10649689     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2006.07.008     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Leung J.W. Screening mammography reduces morbidity of breast cancer treatment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184 (2005) 1508-1509
2. Otto S.J., Fracheboud J., Looman C.W., et al. National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening. Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breast-cancer mortality: a systematic review. Lancet 361 (2003) 1411-1417
3. Tabar L., Yen M.F., Vitak B., et al. Mammography screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet 361 (2003) 1405-1410
4. Nystrom L., Andersson I., Bjurstam N., et al. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 359 (2002) 909-919
5. Kopans D.B. The most recent breast cancer screening controversy about whether mammographic screening benefits women at any age: nonsense and nonscience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180 (2003) 21-26
6. Morris E.A., Liberman L., Ballon D.J., et al. MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181 (2003) 619-626
7. Liberman L., Morris E.A., Dershaw D.D., et al. MR imaging of the ipsilateral breast in women with percutaneously proven breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180 (2003) 901-910
8. Liberman L., Morris E.A., Kim C.M., et al. MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180 (2003) 333-341
9. Fischer U., Zachariae O., Baum F., et al. The influence of preoperative MRI of the breasts on recurrence rate in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 14 (2004) 1725-1731
10. Bluemke D.A., Gatsonis C.A., Chen M.H., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy. JAMA 292 (2004) 2735-2742
11. Lee J.M., Orel S.G., Czerniecki B.J., et al. MRI before reexcision surgery in patients with breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182 (2004) 473-480
12. Lehman C.D., Blume J.D., Weatherall P., et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 103 (2005) 1898-1905
13. Hylton N. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: opportunities to improve breast cancer management. J Clin Oncol 23 (2005) 1678-1684
14. Hwang E.S., Kinkel K., Esserman L.J., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma-in-situ: value in the diagnosis of residual disease, occult invasion, and multicentricity. Ann Surg Oncol 10 (2003) 381-388
15. Wallace A.M., Daniel B.L., Jeffrey S.S., et al. Rates of reexcision for breast cancer after magnetic resonance imaging-guided bracket wire localization. J Am Coll Surg 200 (2005) 527-537
16. Meisamy S., Bolan P.J., Baker E.H., et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer: predicting response with in vivo (1)H MR spectroscopy-a pilot study at 4 T. Radiology 233 (2004) 424-431
17. Londero V., Bazzocchi M., Del Frate C., et al. Locally advanced breast cancer: comparison of mammography, sonography and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur Radiol 14 (2004) 1371-1379
18. Partridge S.C., Gibbs J.E., Lu Y., et al. Accuracy of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179 (2002) 1193-1199
19. Kuhl C.K., Schmutzler R.K., Leutner C.C., et al. Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology 215 (2000) 267-279
20. Stoutjesdijk M.J., Boetes C., Jager G.J., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and mammography in women with a hereditary risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 93 (2001) 1095-1102
21. Warner E., Plewes D.B., Hill K.A., et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 292 (2004) 1317
22. Kriege M., Brekelmans C.T., Boetes C., et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Study Group. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 351 (2004) 427-437
23. Fryback D.G., and Thornbury R. The Efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 11 (1991) 88-94
24. Hillman B.J. Outcomes research and cost-effectiveness analysis for diagnostic imaging. Radiology 193 (1994) 307-310
25. Hillman B.J. Critical thinking: deciding whether to incorporate into practice the recommendations of radiology publications and presentations. Am J Roentagenol 174 (2000) 943-946
26. Black W.C. How to evaluate the radiology literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154 (1990) 17-22
27. Thornbury J.R., Fryback D.G., and Edwards W. Likelihood ratios as a measure of diagnostic usefulness of excretory urogram information. Radiology 114 (1975) 561-565
28. Omary R.A., Kaplan P.A., Dussault R.G., et al. The impact of ankle radiography on the diagnosis and management of acute ankle injuries. Acad Radiol 3 (1996) 758-765
29. Black W.C. Overdiagnosis: an underrecognized cause of confusion and harm in cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 92 (2000) 1280-1282
30. Black W.C., and Ling A. Is earlier diagnosis really better? The misleading effects of lead time and length biases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 155 (1990) 625-630
31. Kopans D.B., Monsees B., and Feig S.A. Screening for cancer: when is it valid? - Lessons from the mammography experience. Radiology 229 (2003) 319-327
32. Henschke C.I., McCauley D.I., Yankelevitz D.F., et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet 354 (1999) 99-105
33. Sone S., Takashima S., Li F., et al. Mass screening for lung cancer with mobile spiral computed tomography scanner. Lancet 351 (1998) 1242-1245
34. Swensen S.J., Jett J.R., Hartman T.E., et al. CT screening for lung cancer: five-year prospective experience. Radiology 235 (2005) 259-265
35. Mahadevia P.J., Fleisher L.A., Frick K.D., et al. Lung cancer screening with helical CT in older adult smokers. JAMA 289 (2003) 313-322
36. Beinfeld M.T., Wittenberg E., and Gazelle G.S. Cost-effectiveness of whole body CT screening. Radiology 234 (2005) 415-422