» Articles » PMID: 17317184

Sensitivity of MRI Versus Conventional Screening in the Diagnosis of BRCA-associated Breast Cancer in a National Prospective Series

Overview
Journal Breast
Publisher Elsevier
Specialties Endocrinology
Oncology
Date 2007 Feb 24
PMID 17317184
Citations 32
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We wanted to compare the sensitivities of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the conventional screening programme consisting of mammography (XRM) +/- ultrasound for early diagnosis of breast cancer in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. BRCA1/2 mutation carriers were examined prospectively by both breast MRI and XRM +/- ultrasound. Eight hundred and sixty-seven MRI examinations were carried out in 445 BRCA1 and 46 BRCA2 mutation carriers. A total of 25 cancers were observed, five (20%) as interval cancers. At the time of diagnosis, sensitivity to detect cancer was 19/22=86% for MRI and 12/24=50% for XRM. Twenty-one were examined by both methods at the time of diagnosis. In the19 BRCA1 mutation carriers among them, MRI had a sensitivity of 1/3(33%) to diagnose DCIS and 15/16 (94%) among the invasive cancers. For XRM the sensitivities were 1/3(33%) for DCIS, 3/7(42%) for pT1b, 3/6(50%) for pT1c, and 3/3/100%) for pT2. In the two BRCA2 mutation carriers, both were demonstrated by breast MRI, neither was detected by XRM. Breast MRI had increased sensitivity compared to XRM to diagnose all cancers staged less than pT2.

Citing Articles

The paradox of MRI for breast cancer screening: high-risk and dense breasts-available evidence and current practice.

Sardanelli F, Magni V, Rossini G, Kilburn-Toppin F, Healy N, Gilbert F Insights Imaging. 2024; 15(1):96.

PMID: 38536530 PMC: 10973307. DOI: 10.1186/s13244-024-01653-4.


Comparative Analysis of Diagnostic Performance of Automatic Breast Ultrasound, Full-Field Digital Mammography and Contrast-Enhanced Mammography in Relation to Breast Composition.

Pawlak M, Rudnicki W, Borkowska A, Skubisz K, Rydzyk R, Luczynska E Biomedicines. 2023; 11(12).

PMID: 38137447 PMC: 10741119. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11123226.


The Japanese breast cancer society clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 2022 edition.

Kubota K, Nakashima K, Nakashima K, Kataoka M, Inoue K, Goto M Breast Cancer. 2023; 31(2):157-164.

PMID: 37973686 PMC: 10901949. DOI: 10.1007/s12282-023-01521-x.


Defining features of hereditary lobular breast cancer due to CDH1 with magnetic resonance imaging and tumor characteristics.

Gamble L, McClelland P, Teke M, Samaranayake S, Juneau P, Famiglietti A NPJ Breast Cancer. 2023; 9(1):77.

PMID: 37758801 PMC: 10533560. DOI: 10.1038/s41523-023-00585-4.


Advances in PET/CT Imaging for Breast Cancer.

de Jong D, Desperito E, Al Feghali K, Dercle L, Seban R, Das J J Clin Med. 2023; 12(13).

PMID: 37445572 PMC: 10342839. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12134537.