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)

Francesco Sardanelli(University of Milan), Franca Podo(Istituto Superiore di Sanità), Filippo Santoro(Istituto Superiore di Sanità), Siranoush Manoukian(IRCCS Azienda Ospedliero-Universitaria di Bologna Policlinico di Sant'Orsola), S Bergonzi(University of Pisa), Giovanna Trecate(Vita-Salute San Raffaele University), Daniele Vergnaghi(Vita-Salute San Raffaele University), Massimo Federico(University of Modena and Reggio Emilia), Laura Cortesi(University of Modena and Reggio Emilia), Stefano Corcione(University of Milan), Sandro Morassut(Istituto Superiore di Sanità), C. Di Maggio(IRCCS Azienda Ospedliero-Universitaria di Bologna Policlinico di Sant'Orsola), A Cilotti(University of Pisa), Laura Martincich(Vita-Salute San Raffaele University), Massimo Calabrese(University of Modena and Reggio Emilia), Chiara Zuiani(University of Milan), Lorenzo Preda(Istituto Superiore di Sanità), Bernardo Bonanni(IRCCS Azienda Ospedliero-Universitaria di Bologna Policlinico di Sant'Orsola), Luca Alessandro Carbonaro(University of Milan), Alma Contegiacomo(University of Pisa), Pietro Panizza(Vita-Salute San Raffaele University), Ernesto Di Cesare(University of Modena and Reggio Emilia), Antonella Savarese(University of Milan), M Crecco(Istituto Superiore di Sanità), Daniela Turchetti(IRCCS Azienda Ospedliero-Universitaria di Bologna Policlinico di Sant'Orsola), M. Tonutti(University of Pisa), Paolo Belli(Vita-Salute San Raffaele University), Alessandro Del Maschio(Vita-Salute San Raffaele University)
Investigative Radiology
December 8, 2010
Cited by 336Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: : To prospectively compare clinical breast examination, mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a multicenter surveillance of high-risk women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: : We enrolled asymptomatic women aged ≥ 25: BRCA mutation carriers; first-degree relatives of BRCA mutation carriers, and women with strong family history of breast/ovarian cancer, including those with previous personal breast cancer. RESULTS: : A total of 18 centers enrolled 501 women and performed 1592 rounds (3.2 rounds/woman). Forty-nine screen-detected and 3 interval cancers were diagnosed: 44 invasive, 8 ductal carcinoma in situ; only 4 pT2 stage; 32 G3 grade. Of 39 patients explored for nodal status, 28 (72%) were negative. Incidence per year-woman resulted 3.3% overall, 2.1% <50, and 5.4% ≥ 50 years (P < 0.001), 4.3% in women with previous personal breast cancer and 2.5% in those without (P = 0.045). MRI was more sensitive (91%) than clinical breast examination (18%), mammography (50%), ultrasonography (52%), or mammography plus ultrasonography (63%) (P < 0.001). Specificity ranged 96% to 99%, positive predictive value 53% to 71%, positive likelihood ratio 24 to 52 (P not significant). MRI showed significantly better negative predictive value (99.6) and negative likelihood ratio (0.09) than those of the other modalities. At receiver operating characteristic analysis, the area under the curve of MRI (0.97) was significantly higher than that of mammography (0.83) or ultrasonography (0.82) and not significantly increased when MRI was combined with mammography and/or ultrasonography. Of 52 cancers, 16 (31%) were diagnosed only by MRI, 8 of 21 (38%) in women <50, and 8 of 31 (26%) in women ≥ 50 years of age. CONCLUSION: : MRI largely outperformed mammography, ultrasonography, and their combination for screening high-risk women below and over 50.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis