Cargando…
Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery
SIMPLE SUMMARY: Breast cancer survivors are at risk for recurrence, and the early detection of recurrence improves survival. Therefore, imaging surveillance is performed for women who have breast-conserving surgery. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare routine mammography with contrast-...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7760311/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33255412 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers12123495 |
_version_ | 1783627302983172096 |
---|---|
author | Gluskin, Jill Rossi Saccarelli, Carolina Avendano, Daly Marino, Maria Adele Bitencourt, Almir G. V. Pilewskie, Melissa Sevilimedu, Varadan Sung, Janice S. Pinker, Katja Jochelson, Maxine S. |
author_facet | Gluskin, Jill Rossi Saccarelli, Carolina Avendano, Daly Marino, Maria Adele Bitencourt, Almir G. V. Pilewskie, Melissa Sevilimedu, Varadan Sung, Janice S. Pinker, Katja Jochelson, Maxine S. |
author_sort | Gluskin, Jill |
collection | PubMed |
description | SIMPLE SUMMARY: Breast cancer survivors are at risk for recurrence, and the early detection of recurrence improves survival. Therefore, imaging surveillance is performed for women who have breast-conserving surgery. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare routine mammography with contrast-enhanced mammography in the screening (asymptomatic) post-treatment setting. We confirmed that when screening women with breast conservation surgery, contrast-enhanced mammography had a higher cancer detection rate (15.4/1000) and positive predictive value of biopsies (42.9%) than full-field digital mammography (6.2/1000 and 37.5%, respectively). ABSTRACT: To investigate the value of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) compared to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in screening breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective, single-institution study included 971 CEM exams in 541 asymptomatic patients treated with BCS who underwent screening CEM between January 2013 and November 2018. Histopathology, or at least a one-year follow-up, was used as the standard of reference. Twenty-one of 541 patients (3.9%) were diagnosed with ipsi- or contralateral breast cancer: six (28.6%) cancers were seen with low-energy images (equivalent to FFDM), an additional nine (42.9%) cancers were detected only on iodine (contrast-enhanced) images, and six interval cancers were identified within 365 days of a negative screening CEM. Of the 10 ipsilateral cancers detected on CEM, four were detected on low-energy images (40%). Of the five contralateral cancers detected on CEM, two were detected on low-energy images (40%). Overall, the cancer detection rate (CDR) for CEM was 15.4/1000 (15/971), and the positive predictive value (PPV3) of the biopsies performed was 42.9% (15/35). For findings seen on low-energy images, with or without contrast, the CDR was 6.2/1000 (6/971), and the PPV3 of the biopsies performed was 37.5% (6/16). In the post-BCS screening setting, CEM has a higher CDR than FFDM. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7760311 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77603112020-12-26 Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery Gluskin, Jill Rossi Saccarelli, Carolina Avendano, Daly Marino, Maria Adele Bitencourt, Almir G. V. Pilewskie, Melissa Sevilimedu, Varadan Sung, Janice S. Pinker, Katja Jochelson, Maxine S. Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Breast cancer survivors are at risk for recurrence, and the early detection of recurrence improves survival. Therefore, imaging surveillance is performed for women who have breast-conserving surgery. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare routine mammography with contrast-enhanced mammography in the screening (asymptomatic) post-treatment setting. We confirmed that when screening women with breast conservation surgery, contrast-enhanced mammography had a higher cancer detection rate (15.4/1000) and positive predictive value of biopsies (42.9%) than full-field digital mammography (6.2/1000 and 37.5%, respectively). ABSTRACT: To investigate the value of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) compared to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in screening breast cancer patients after breast-conserving surgery (BCS), this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved retrospective, single-institution study included 971 CEM exams in 541 asymptomatic patients treated with BCS who underwent screening CEM between January 2013 and November 2018. Histopathology, or at least a one-year follow-up, was used as the standard of reference. Twenty-one of 541 patients (3.9%) were diagnosed with ipsi- or contralateral breast cancer: six (28.6%) cancers were seen with low-energy images (equivalent to FFDM), an additional nine (42.9%) cancers were detected only on iodine (contrast-enhanced) images, and six interval cancers were identified within 365 days of a negative screening CEM. Of the 10 ipsilateral cancers detected on CEM, four were detected on low-energy images (40%). Of the five contralateral cancers detected on CEM, two were detected on low-energy images (40%). Overall, the cancer detection rate (CDR) for CEM was 15.4/1000 (15/971), and the positive predictive value (PPV3) of the biopsies performed was 42.9% (15/35). For findings seen on low-energy images, with or without contrast, the CDR was 6.2/1000 (6/971), and the PPV3 of the biopsies performed was 37.5% (6/16). In the post-BCS screening setting, CEM has a higher CDR than FFDM. MDPI 2020-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7760311/ /pubmed/33255412 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers12123495 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Gluskin, Jill Rossi Saccarelli, Carolina Avendano, Daly Marino, Maria Adele Bitencourt, Almir G. V. Pilewskie, Melissa Sevilimedu, Varadan Sung, Janice S. Pinker, Katja Jochelson, Maxine S. Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery |
title | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery |
title_full | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery |
title_fullStr | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery |
title_full_unstemmed | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery |
title_short | Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery |
title_sort | contrast-enhanced mammography for screening women after breast conserving surgery |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7760311/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33255412 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers12123495 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gluskinjill contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT rossisaccarellicarolina contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT avendanodaly contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT marinomariaadele contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT bitencourtalmirgv contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT pilewskiemelissa contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT sevilimeduvaradan contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT sungjanices contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT pinkerkatja contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery AT jochelsonmaxines contrastenhancedmammographyforscreeningwomenafterbreastconservingsurgery |