Role of MRI in breast cancer management

Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine

Volumn 76, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 525-532

  Enriquez, Louie ^a   Listinsky, Jay ^b  

^a Radiology Imaging Associates   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PREOPERATIVE CARE; RADIOGRAPHY; REVIEW;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; PREOPERATIVE CARE; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 70449711496     PISSN: 08911150     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3949/ccjm.76a.06043     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts and figures 2008-2009. Atlanta: American Cancer Society. http:/www.cancer.org/docroot/STT/content/STT_1x_Breast_Cancer_Facts_Figures_2007-2008_08.asp. Accessed 10/9/2009.
2. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, et al. Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age: new results from the Swedish Two-County Trial. Cancer 1995; 75:2507-2517.
3. Vachon CM, van Gils CH, Sellers TA, et al. Mammographic density, breast cancer risk and risk prediction. Breast Cancer Res 2007; 9:217.
4. Warren R. Hormones and mammographic breast density. Maturitas 2004; 49:67-78.
5. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138:168-175.
6. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick RE, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005; 53:1773-1783.
7. Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology 2008; 246:376-383.
8. Barlow WE, Lehman CD, Zheng Y, et al. Performance of diagnostic mammography for women with signs or symptoms of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:1151-1159.
9. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2008; 299:2151-2163.
10. Heywang SH, Hahn D, Schmid H, et al. MR imaging of the breast using gadolinium-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1986; 10:199-204.
11. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Viehweg P, Heinig A, Kuchler CH. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur J Radiol 1997; 24:94-108.
12. Lee CH. Problem solving MR imaging of the breast. Radiol Clin North Am 2004; 42:919-934.
13. Heywang SH, Wolf A, Pruss E, Hilbertz T, Eiermann W, Permanetter W. MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology 1989; 171:95-103.
14. Gilles R, Guinebretière JM, Lucidarme O, et al. Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 191:625-631.
15. Fobben ES, Rubin CZ, Kalisher L, Dembner AG, Seltzer MH, Santoro EJ. Breast MR imaging with commercially available techniques: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1995; 196:143-152.
16. Müller-Schimpfle M, Ohmenhaüser K, Stoll P, Dietz K, Claussen CD. Menstrual cycle and age: influence on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 1997; 203:145-149.
17. Orel SG, Schnall MD, Powell CM, et al. Staging of suspected breast cancer: effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 1995; 196:115-122.
18. Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Heller R, et al. MR imaging of the breast in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176:399-406.
19. Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ, et al. MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:619-626.
20. Esserman L, Hylton N, Yassa L, Barclay J, Frankel S, Sickles E. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: evidence for improved preoperative staging. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17:110-119.
21. Boetes C, Mus RD, Holland R, et al. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent. Radiology 1995; 197:743-747.
22. Fischer U, Kopa L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 1999; 213:881-888.
23. Orel SG, Reynolds C, Schnall MD, Solin LJ, Fraker DL, Sullivan DC. Breast carcinoma: MR imaging before re-excisional biopsy. Radiology 1997; 205:429-436.
24. Frei KA, Kinkel K, Bonel HM, Lu Y, Esserman LJ, Hylton NM. MR imaging of the breast in patients with positive margins after lumpectomy: influence of the time interval between lumpectomy and MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:1577-1584.
25. Gilles R, Guinebretière JM, Shapeero LG, et al. Assessment of breast cancer recurrence with contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging: preliminary results in 26 patients. Radiology 1993; 188:473-478.
26. Lewis-Jones HG, Whitehouse GH, Leinster SJ. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of local recurrent breast carcinoma. Clinical Radiol 1991; 43:197-204.
27. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian cancer. www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp. Accessed May 4, 2009.
28. Morrow M, Freedman G. A clinical oncology perspective on the use of breast MR. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:363-378.
29. Schnall M. MR imaging of cancer extent: is there clinical relevance? Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006; 14:379-381.