The role of dynamic contrast-enhanced screening breast MRI in populations at increased risk for breast cancer

Women's Health

Volumn 10, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 609-622

  Gillman, Jennifer ^a   Toth, Hildegard K ^a   Moy, Linda ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

breast MRI; guidelines; high risk; MRI; screening

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BACKGROUND PARENCHYMAL ENHANCEMENT; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST DENSITY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; GENE MUTATION; HETEROZYGOTE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENE; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETICS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RISK;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RISK;

EID: 84916630498     PISSN: 17455057     EISSN: 17455065     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/whe.14.61     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2013. GA, USA. www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content
2. Howlader N, Noone A, Krapcho M et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2009 (Vintage 2009 Populations). MD, USA. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975-2009-pops09
3. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, Bougatsos C, Chan BK, Humphrey L. Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann. Intern. Med. 151(10), 727-737 (2009).
4. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus flm mammography for breast-cancer screening. N. Engl. J. Med. 353 (17), 1773-1783 (2005).
5. Skaane P, Hofvind S, Skjennald A. Randomized trial of screen-flm versus full-feld digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and fnal results of Oslo II study. Radiology 244(3), 708-717 (2007).
6. 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. 23(33), 8469-8476 (2005).
7. Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F et al. Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk italian 1 study): fnal results. Invest. Radiol. 46(2), 94-105 (2011).
8. Armes JE, Venter DJ. The pathology of inherited breast cancer. Pathology 34(4), 309-314 (2002).
9. Lakhani SR, Jacquemier J, Sloane JP et al. Multifactorial analysis of differences between sporadic breast cancers and cancers involving BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 90(15), 1138-1145 (1998).
10. Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Hacker A, Sedlacek S. Advantages and disadvantages of mammography screening. Breast Care (Basel). 6(3), 199-207 (2011).
11. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA. Cancer J. Clin. 57(2), 75-89 (2007).
12. NCCN. Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. http://www.nccn.org/professionals
13. Mainiero MB, Lourenco A, Mahoney MC et al. ACR appropriateness criteria breast cancer screening. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 10(1), 11-14 (2013).
14. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG-Annual Mammograms Now Recommended for Women Beginning at Age 40. www.acog.org/About-ACOG/News-Room
15. The American Society of Breast Surgeons. Position statement on the use of magnetic resonance imaging in breast surgical oncology. MD, USA. www.breastsurgeons.org/statements
16. Stout NK, Nekhlyudov L, Li L et al. Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011. JAMA Intern. Med. 174(1), 114-121 (2014).
17. Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlikowske K. Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann. Intern. Med. 148(5), 337-347 (2008).
18. Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA. Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 93(5), 358-366 (2001).
19. Amir E. Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme. J. Med. Genet. 40(11), 807-814 (2003).
20. Anothaisintawee T, Teerawattananon Y, Wiratkapun C, Kasamesup V, Thakkinstian A. Risk prediction models of breast cancer: a systematic review of model performances. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 133(1), 1-10 (2012).
21. Chen J, Pee D, Ayyagari R et al. Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 98 (17), 1215-1226 (2006).
22. Tice JA, Cummings SR, Ziv E, Kerlikowske K. Mammographic breast density and the Gail model for breast cancer risk prediction in a screening population. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 94(2), 115-122 (2005).
23. Berg WA. Tailored supplemental screening for breast cancer: what now and what next? Am. J. Roentgenol. 192 (2), 390-199 (2009).
24. Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat. Med. 23 (7), 1111-1130 (2004).
25. Hollingsworth AB, Stough RG. An alternative approach to selecting patients for high-risk screening with breast MRI. Breast J. 20(2), 192-197 (2014).
26. Graubard BI, Freedman AN, Gail MH. Five-year and lifetime risk of breast cancer among U.S. subpopulations: implications for magnetic resonance imaging screening. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 19(10), 2430-2436 (2010).
27. Kriege M, Brekelmans CTM, Boetes C et al. Effcacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N. Engl. J. Med. 351(5), 427-437 (2004).
28. 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 292(11), 1317-1325 (2004).
29. Leach MO, Boggis CRM, Dixon AK et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet 365 (9473), 1769-1778 (2005).
30. Hagen AI, Kvistad KA, Maehle L et al. Sensitivity of MRI versus conventional screening in the diagnosis of BRCA-associated breast cancer in a national prospective series. Breast 16(4), 367-374 (2007).
31. Lippman M. Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine 18e ed. McGraw-Hill, NY, USA. http://accessmedicine.mhmedical.com/content
32. Tilanus-Linthorst MMA, Obdeijn I-M, Hop WCJ et al. BRCA1 mutation and young age predict fast breast cancer growth in the Dutch, United Kingdom, and Canadian magnetic resonance imaging screening trials. Clin. Cancer Res. 13(24), 7357-62 (2007).
33. Rijnsburger AJ, Obdeijn I-M, Kaas R et al. BRCA1-associated breast cancers present differently from BRCA2-associated and familial cases: long-term follow-up of the Dutch MRISC Screening Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 28(36), 5265-5273 (2010).
34. Heijnsdijk EAM, Warner E, Gilbert FJ et al. Differences in natural history between breast cancers in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers and effects of MRI screening-MRISC, MARIBS, and Canadian studies combined. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 21(9), 1458-1468 (2012).
35. Nelson HD, Pappas M, Zakher B, Mitchell JP, Okinaka-Hu L, Fu R. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: a systematic review to update the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann. Intern. Med. 160(4), 255-266 (2013).
36. Uray IP, Brown PH. Chemoprevention of hormone receptor-negative breast cancer: new approaches needed. Recent Results Cancer Res. 188, 147-162 (2011).
37. Henderson TO, Amsterdam A, Bhatia S et al. Systematic review: surveillance for breast cancer in women treated with chest radiation for childhood, adolescent, or young adult cancer. Ann. Intern. Med. 152 (7), 444-455 (2010).
38. Sung JS, Lee CH, Morris EA, Oeffnger KC, Dershaw DD. Screening breast MR imaging in women with a history of chest irradiation. Radiology 259(1), 65-71 (2011).
39. Ng AK, Garber JE, Diller LR et al. Prospective study of the effcacy of breast magnetic resonance imaging and mammographic screening in survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 31(18), 2282-2288 (2013).
40. Lowry KP, Lee JM, Kong CY et al. Annual screening strategies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers: a comparative effectiveness analysis. Cancer 118 (8), 2021-2030 (2012).
41. Le-Petross HT, Whitman GJ, Atchley DP et al. Effectiveness of alternating mammography and magnetic resonance imaging for screening women with deleterious BRCA mutations at high risk of breast cancer. Cancer 117(17), 3900-3907 (2011).
42. Cott Chubiz JE, Lee JM, Gilmore ME et al. Cost-effectiveness of alternating magnetic resonance imaging and digital mammography screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. Cancer 119(6), 1266-1276 (2013).
43. Houssami N, Abraham LA, Miglioretti DL et al. Accuracy and outcomes of screening mammography in women with a personal history of early-stage breast cancer. JAMA 305(8), 790-799 (2011).
44. Brennan S, Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Morris E. Breast MRI screening of women with a personal history of breast cancer. Am. J. Roentgenol. 195(2), 510-516 (2010).
45. Schacht D V, Yamaguchi K, Lai J, Kulkarni K, Sennett CA, Abe H. Importance of a personal history of breast cancer as a risk factor for the development of subsequent breast cancer: results from screening breast MRI. Am. J. Roentgenol. 202(2), 289-292 (2014).
46. King TA, Muhsen S, Patil S et al. Is there a role for routine screening MRI in women with LCIS? Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 142(2), 445-453 (2013).
47. Friedlander LC, Roth SO, Gavenonis SC. Results of MR imaging screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with lobular carcinoma in situ. Radiology 261(2), 421-427 (2011).
48. Sung JS, Malak SF, Bajaj P, Alis R, Dershaw DD, Morris EA. Screening breast MR imaging in women with a history of lobular carcinoma in situ. Radiology 261(2), 414-420 (2011).
49. Bassett LW, Dhaliwal SG, Eradat J et al. National trends and practices in breast MRI. Am. J. Roentgenol. 191(2), 332-339 (2008).
50. Port ER, Park A, Borgen PI, Morris E, Montgomery LL. Results of MRI screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with LCIS and atypical hyperplasia. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 14(3), 1051-1057 (2007).
51. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 15 (6), 1159-1169 (2006).
52. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Yaffe MJ, Minkin S. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects. Breast Cancer Res. 13(6), 223 (2011).
53. Sardanelli F, Giuseppetti GM, Panizza P et al. Sensitivity of MRI versus mammography for detecting foci of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer in Fatty and dense breasts using the whole-breast pathologic examination as a gold standard. Am. J. Roentgenol. 183 (4), 1149-1157 (2004).
54. Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA 307(13), 1394-1404 (2012).
55. Kuhl C, Weigel S, Schrading S et al. Prospective multicenter cohort study to refne management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 28(9), 1450-1457 (2010).
56. Warner E, Hill K, Causer P et al. Prospective study of breast cancer incidence in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation under surveillance with and without magnetic resonance imaging. J. Clin. Oncol. 29 (13), 1664-1669 (2011).
57. Morrow M, Waters J, Morris E. MRI for breast cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Lancet 378(9805), 1804-1811 (2011).
58. Lord SJ, Lei W, Craft P et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an addition to mammography and ultrasound in screening young women at high risk of breast cancer. Eur. J. Cancer 43 (13), 1905-1917 (2007).
59. Narod SA. Screening of women at high risk for breast cancer. Prev. Med. (Baltim). 53(3), 127-130 (2011).
60. Griebsch I, Brown J, Boggis C et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 95(7), 801-810 (2006).
61. Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA 295(20), 2374-2384 (2006).
62. Lee JM, McMahon PM, Kong CY et al. Cost-effectiveness of breast MR imaging and screen-flm mammography for screening BRCA1 gene mutation carriers. Radiology 254(3), 793-800 (2010).
63. Taneja C, Edelsberg J, Weycker D, Guo A, Oster G, Weinreb J. Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening with contrast-enhanced MRI in high-risk women. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 6 (3), 171-179 (2009).
64. Feig S. Cost-effectiveness of mammography, MRI, and ultrasonography for breast cancer screening. Radiol. Clin. North Am. 48(5), 879-891 (2010).
65. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, Bieling H. Accelerated breast MRI for breast cancer screening. Presented at: ASCO 2013 Chicago, USA, 31 May-4 June 2013.
66. Heacock L, Melsaether AN, Pysarenko KM, Babb JS, Toth HB, Moy L. Sensitivity of an abridged breast mri protocol to detect a known breast cancer. Presented at: RSNA 201399th Scientifc Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago, USA, 1-6 December 2013.
67. King V, Brooks JD, Bernstein JL, Reiner AS, Pike MC, Morris EA. Background parenchymal enhancement at breast MR imaging and breast cancer risk. Radiology 260(1), 50-60 (2011).
68. Amarosa AR, McKellop J, Klautau Leite AP et al. Evaluation of the kinetic properties of background parenchymal enhancement throughout the phases of the menstrual cycle. Radiology 268(2), 356-365 (2013).
69. King V, Gu Y, Kaplan JB, Brooks JD, Pike MC, Morris EA. Impact of menopausal status on background parenchymal enhancement and fbroglandular tissue on breast MRI. Eur. Radiol. 22(12), 2641-2647 (2012).
70. King V, Kaplan J, Pike MC et al. Impact of tamoxifen on amount of fbroglandular tissue, background parenchymal enhancement, and cysts on breast magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J. 18(6), 527-534 (2012).
71. King V, Goldfarb SB, Brooks JD et al. Effect of aromatase inhibitors on background parenchymal enhancement and amount of fbroglandular tissue at breast MR imaging. Radiology 264(3), 670-678 (2012).
72. Price ER, Brooks JD, Watson EJ, Brennan SB, Comen EA, Morris EA. The impact of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy on breast MRI background parenchymal enhancement and fbroglandular tissue. Eur. Radiol. 24(1), 162-168 (2014).
73. Cubuk R, Tasali N, Narin B, Keskiner F, Celik L, Guney S. Correlation between breast density in mammography and background enhancement in MR mammography. Radiol. Med. 115(3), 434-441 (2010).
74. Hambly NM, Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Brennan S, Morris EA. Background parenchymal enhancement on baseline screening breast MRI: impact on biopsy rate and short-interval follow-up. Am. J. Roentgenol. 196(1), 218-224 (2011).
75. DeMartini WB, Liu F, Peacock S, Eby PR, Gutierrez RL, Lehman CD. Background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: impact on diagnostic performance. Am. J. Roentgenol. 198(4), W373-W380 (2012).
76. Woodhams R, Ramadan S, Stanwell P et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast: principles and clinical applications. Radiographics 31(4), 1059-1084.
77. Kul S, Cansu A, Alhan E, Dinc H, Gunes G, Reis A. Contribution of diffusion-weighted imaging to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the characterization of breast tumors. Am. J. Roentgenol. 196 (1), 210-217 (2011).
78. Bogner W, Gruber S, Pinker K et al. Diffusion-weighted MR for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 T: how does selection of diffusion protocols affect diagnosis? Radiology 253(2), 341-351 (2009).
79. Yabuuchi H, Matsuo Y, Sunami S et al. Detection of non-palpable breast cancer in asymptomatic women by using unenhanced diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted MR imaging: comparison with mammography and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur. Radiol. 21(1), 11-17 (2011).