Cancer Yield of Mammography, MR, and US in High-Risk Women: Prospective Multi-Institution Breast Cancer Screening Study

Abstract

Screening MR imaging had a higher biopsy rate but helped detect more cancers than either mammography or US. US had the highest false-negative rate compared with mammography and MR, enabling detection of only one in six cancers in high-risk women.

Multimodality Breast Cancer Screening in Women with a Familial or Genetic Predisposition

“…Our findings compare favourably with those reported in similar trials (Table vi) [26][27][28][29]31,32,39 . The sensitivity reported here for mri is in the lower range, and possible reasons have already been presented.…”

“…Prospective nonrandomized controlled studies comparing mri-either as an adjunct to mg, ultrasonography (us), and clinical breast examination (cbe) or to mg alone-showed consistent evidence that mri significantly improved the sensitivity for breast cancer detection [26][27][28][29][30][31][32] . However, reported studies have been heterogeneous in terms of patient population (proportion of women with BRCA mutations), screening interval, number of diagnostic modalities, imaging techniques, and centre experience.…”

Recommendations for research priorities in breast cancer by the coalition of cancer cooperative groups scientific leadership council: imaging and local therapy

“…A small prospective study compared the cancer yield of MRI, mammography, and ultrasound (N = 171) [22]. Ultrasound produced a diagnostic yield of 0.6% compared with 3.5% for MRI and 1.2% for mammography.…”

Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Are Those Who Need It Getting It?

“…In breast imaging, mri is indicated for the detection and management of breast cancer, offering a sensitivity for cancer detection superior to that with other imaging modalities-ranging between 71% and 100% [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] . Between 2000 and 2009, demand for breast mri soared, increasing by a factor of more than 20 12 .…”

“…Between 2000 and 2009, demand for breast mri soared, increasing by a factor of more than 20 12 . However, breast mri must be used with discernment given its limited specificity: very low in the earliest reports, but now generally accepted to be in the 60%-80% range [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] . Moreover, evidence is increasing that preoperative staging mri might be detrimental to patients, unnecessarily lengthening their investigation time because of the detection of additional nonspecific findings 13,14 and increasing the mastectomy rate with little reduction in re-excision and negative margins rates 15 .…”