Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Radiology. 2019 Aug;292(2):311-318. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182475. Epub 2019 Jun 4.

Surveillance Breast MRI and Mammography: Comparison in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer.

Author information

1
From the Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Suite 1600, Seattle, WA 98101 (K.J.W., L.I., D.S.M.B., S.D.B., M.B., D.J., D.L.M.); Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology and Biostatistics, General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (K.K.); Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC (L.M.H.); Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass (L.N.); Department of Biomedical Data Science, Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH (T.O.); Departments of Surgery and Radiology, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance Seattle, Wash (J.M.L.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass (C.D.L.); Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, Calif (D.L.M.).

Abstract

Background There is lack of consensus regarding the use of breast MRI for routine surveillance for second breast cancer events in women with a personal history of breast cancer. Purpose To compare performance of surveillance mammography with breast MRI. Materials and Methods This observational cohort study used prospectively collected data and included 13 266 women age 18 years and older (mean age, 60 years ± 13) with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent 33 938 mammographic examinations and 2506 breast MRI examinations from 2005 to 2012 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Women were categorized into two groups: mammography alone (n = 11 745) or breast MRI (n = 1521). Performance measures were calculated by using end-of-day assessment and occurrence of second breast cancer events within 1 year of imaging. Logistic regression was used to compare performance for breast MRI versus mammography alone, adjusting for women, examination, and primary breast cancer characteristics. Analysis was conducted on a per-examination basis. Results Breast MRI was associated with younger age at diagnosis, chemotherapy, and higher education and income. Raw performance measures for breast MRI versus mammography were as follows, respectively: cancer detection rates, 10.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7, 14.8) versus 8.2 (95% CI: 7.3, 9.2) per 1000 examinations; sensitivity, 61.4% (27 of 44; 95% CI: 46.5%, 76.2%) versus 70.3% (279 of 397; 95% CI: 65.8%, 74.8%); and biopsy rate, 10.1% (253 of 2506; 95% CI: 8.9%, 11.3%) versus 4.0% (1343 of 33 938; 95% CI: 3.7%, 4.2%). In multivariable models, breast MRI was associated with higher biopsy rate (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% CI: 1.9, 2.7; P < .001) and cancer detection rate (OR, 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.7; P = .03) than mammography alone. However, there were no differences in sensitivity (OR, 1.1; 95% CI: 0.4, 2.9; P = .84) or interval cancer rate (OR, 1.1; 95% CI: 0.6, 2.2; P = .70). Conclusion Comparison of the performance of surveillance breast MRI with mammography must account for patient characteristics. Whereas breast MRI leads to higher biopsy and cancer detection rates, there were no significant differences in sensitivity or interval cancers compared with mammography.

PMID:
31161975
DOI:
10.1148/radiol.2019182475

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon
Loading ...
Support Center