Background parenchymal enhancement on baseline screening breast MRI: Impact on biopsy rate and short-interval follow-up

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 196, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 218-224

  Hambly, Niamh M ^a,b   Liberman, Laura ^a   Dershaw, D David ^a   Brennan, Sandra ^a   Morris, Elizabeth A ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b BEAUMONT HOSPITAL   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Background parenchymal enhancement; BI RADS category 3; MRI breast biopsy rate; Screening breast MRI

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BACKGROUND PARENCHYMAL ENHANCEMENT; BIOPSY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARENCHYMA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCREENING;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 78650836842     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.10.4550     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Muller-Schimpfle M, Ohmenhauser K, Stoll P, Dietz K, Claussen C. Menstrual cycle and age: influence on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 1997; 203:145-149 (Pubitemid 27142722)
2. Kuhl CK, Bieling HB, Gieseke J, et al. Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast enhanced MR imaging of the breast: normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical phase dependency. Radiology 1997; 203:137-144 (Pubitemid 27142721)
3. Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Halp ern EF, Garrido L. Hormone replacement therapy in postmenopausal women: breast tissue perfusion determined with MR imaging - initial observations. Radiology 2005; 235:36-41
4. Vogel PM, Georgiade NG, Fetter BF, Vogel S, McCarty KS. The correlation of histologic changes in the human breast with the menstrual cycle. Am J Pathol 1981; 104:23-24
5. Soderqvist G, Isaksson E, von Schoultz B, Carlstrom K, Tani E, Skoog L. Proliferation of breast epithelial cells in healthy women during the menstrual cycle. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176:123-128
6. Ramakrishnan R, Khan SA, Badve S. Morphological changes in breast tissue with menstrual cycle. Mod Pathol 2002; 15:1348-1356
7. Zeppa R. Vascular response of the breast to estrogen. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1969; 29:695-700
8. Potten CS, Watson RJ, Williams GT, et al. The affect of age and menstrual cycle upon proliferative activity of the normal human breast. Br J Cancer 1988; 58:163-170
9. Hulka CA, Smith BL, Sgroi DC, et al. Benign and malignant breast lesions: differentiation with echoplanar MR imaging. Radiology 1995; 197:33-38
10. Hulka CA, Edmister WB, Smith BL, et al. Dynamic echo-planar imaging of the breast: experience in diagnosing breast carcinoma and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1997; 205:837-842
11. van Dijke CF, Brasch RC, Roberts TP, et al. Mammary carcinoma model: correlation of macromolecular contrast-enhanced MR imaging characterizations of tumor microvasculature and histologic capillary density. Radiology 1996; 198:813-818
12. Dvorak HF, Nagy JA, Dvorak JT, Dvorak AM. Identification and characterization of the blood vessels of solid tumors that are leaky to circulating macromolecules. Am J Pathol 1988; 133:95-109
13. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1996; 200:639-649 (Pubitemid 26282258)
14. Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 2001; 220:13-30
15. Liberman L, Morris EA, Benton CL, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD. Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2003; 98:377-388
16. Sadowski EA, Kelcz F. Frequency of malignancy in lesions classified as probably benign after dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI examinations. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21:556-564 (Pubitemid 40586754)
17. Eby PR, DeMartini WB, Peacock S, Rosen EL, Lauro B, Lehman CD. Cancer yield of probably benign breast MR examinations. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 26:950-955
18. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, 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 2004; 351:427-437
19. Kuhl CK, Schmutzler RK, Leutner CC, et al. Breast MR imaging in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology 2000; 215:267-279
20. Eby PR, DeMartini WB, Gutierrez RL, Saini MH, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Characteristics of probably benign breast MRI lesions. AJR 2009; 193:861-867
21. Vizcaino I, Gadea L, Andreo L, et al.; Screening Program Working Group. Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography. Radiology 2001; 219:475-483
22. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991; 179:463-468
23. Monticciolo DL, Caplan LS. The American College of Radiology's BI-RADS 3 classification in a nationwide screening program: current assessment and comparison with earlier use. Breast J 2004; 10:106-110
24. 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 [Erratum in Ann Intern Med 2003; 138:771]
25. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V. Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. JAMA 1996; 276:33-38
26. Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:1081-1087 (Pubitemid 30616482)
27. Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ, et al. MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR 2003; 181:619-626
28. Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P, et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2005; 103:1898-1905
29. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn IM, Bartels KC, de Konig HJ, Oudkerk M. First experiences in screening women at high risk for breast cancer with MR imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2000; 63:53-60
30. Sardanelli F, Podo F, D'Agnolo G, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT Study): interim results. Radiology 2007; 242:698-715 (Pubitemid 46310082)
31. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 2004; 292:1317-1325 (Pubitemid 39223222)
32. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:8469-8476
33. Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, et al.; MARIBS Study Group Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet 2005; 365:1769-1778 [Erratum in Lancet 2005; 365:1848]
34. Arkani-Hamed S, Newstead G, Abe H, et al. Parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI may be a marker for cancer risk: correlation of parenchymal enhancement with mammographic density. (abstr) American Roentgen Ray Society 106th annual meeting abstract book. Leesburg, VA: ARRS, 2006; 186:A69-A70