Breast Cancer Imaging and Detection
Editorial
Breast Cancer Imaging and Detection
WCW Chu
Editor-in-Chief, Hong Kong Journal of Radiology
Breast imaging is a fast-advancing subspecialty in
radiology owing to the magnitude of its demand for
breast cancer detection.
X-ray mammography is a widely available, relatively
inexpensive, and repeatable method for breast cancer
detection. However, the sensitivity and cancer detection
rate of mammography is significantly reduced in women
with dense breast tissues, because lesions may be obscured
by breast densities. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT)
reduces overlap of breast tissue, reducing false-positive
recalls across breast density categories.[1] The sensitivity
of DBT has been reported as 81% for single-view DBT
versus 60% for two-dimensional mammography in a
prospective population-based screening.[2] In Hong Kong,
more and more DBT machines have been installed in
radiology departments of Hospital Authority hospitals
as part of the scheduled equipment replacement
programme, and local experience with DBT is growing.
Major screening centres in Hong Kong have adopted
DBT, including the community-based Breast Health
Centre established by the Hong Kong Breast Cancer
Foundation with funding from the Hong Kong Jockey
Club Charity Trust.
In the current issue of Hong Kong Journal of Radiology,
Fung et al[3] describe their experience of the most common
sonographic occult non-calcified breast lesions detected
by DBT: architectural distortion and focal asymmetry.
The authors achieved successful tissue sampling in 97%
of subjects without significant complications, and about
8% of ultrasound-occult but DBT-detectable lesions
were found to be malignant.
Breast magnetic resonance imaging (BMRI) is another
proposed modality for breast screening. Recently
abbreviated BMRI has been introduced to reduce the
complexity and cost of MRI. Multiple studies have
confirmed equivalent diagnostic accuracy of abbreviated
BMRI with full MRI protocols.[4] With shorter acquisition and interpretation time than conventional BMRI,
abbreviated BMRI is more accessible.[5]
Kim[6] compare the detectability of breast cancer by
unenhanced abbreviated BMRI based on diffusion-weighted
imaging (DWI) with that by postcontrast
abbreviated BMRI. The diagnostic accuracy was
comparable between the two techniques, but the
specificity of DWI was slightly higher than that of
postcontrast MRI. Although alleviating patients from the
pain and potential hazard of intravenous contrast such
as allergy and gadolinium deposition in the brain, the
false-negative rate of unenhanced abbreviated BMRI
was higher than that of postcontrast abbreviated BMRI,
especially for small cancers (≤10 mm). In addition,
malignant lesions with high water content such as
mucinous carcinoma or triple-negative cancer with
extensive necrosis might not be picked up by DWI-unenhanced
MRI owing to the high apparent diffusion
coefficient values within these lesions.
With increasing utilisation of screening mammography
and public awareness of self-examination of breasts,
early and smaller non-palpable breast cancer lesions
can be detected. For other patients with more advanced
local breast cancer, sufficient tumour shrinkage might
also be achieved after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Breast-conserving therapy rather than mastectomy
is advocated as the main surgical option for suitable
candidates, with the end goals of excising the tumour to
negative margins while providing satisfactory cosmesis.
Image-guided preoperative localisation is important for
accurate lesion identification and successful surgical
excision in breast-conserving therapy. Preoperative
localisation techniques for breast and axillary lesions
have evolved to include both wire and nonwire methods.
The conventional hookwire localisation has been
increasingly replaced by newer wireless localisation
techniques such as radioactive seeds, magnetic seeds,
radar reflectors, and radiofrequency identification tag localisers owing to their increased scheduling flexibility.[7]
Wong et al[8] review cases and discuss stereotactic
radioguided occult lesion localisation and sentinel node
localisation. The authors found that these techniques
were effective in localising nonpalpable breast lesions
with a high surgical success rate. The authors commented
that invasive carcinoma was associated with worse
target localisation while injection of radioisotope in a
lateromedial approach was associated with better target
localisation.
Tsui et al[9] compare the performance of non-radiative
magnetic marker in wireless localisation with
radioguided occult lesion localisation. They found
significant lower intra-operative re-excision rate
when using magnetic marker localisation. Successful
placement of the magnetic marker was 100% with
ultrasound guidance and 85% with stereotactic guidance.
There was displacement of the magnetic marker during
the interval between localisation and operation (4-14
days), but this was non-significant and did not affect
the overall surgical success rate of removing the occult
breast lesions. The authors commented that magnetic
marker localisation was more efficient in workflow and
allows flexibility in appointment arrangement. Indeed,
nonwire localisation can be performed days ahead of
the operation dates, at the convenience of both patients
and radiologists. This technique may be particularly
important in maintaining the capacity to support ongoing
patient management amidst the unprecedented operation
scheduling challenges in the coronavirus disease 2019
pandemic.
Hong Kong Journal of Radiology serves as a platform
for sharing experience of recently developed and
advanced new imaging techniques among different
centres in Hong Kong or internationally. Although
the main aim of breast imaging is for breast cancer
detection, there is a wide spectrum of non-cancerous
breast lesions that are commonly encountered in our
daily practice. Chan et al[10] provide a pictorial review of echogenic lesions detected on ultrasound, and Chow
et al[11] illustrate breast manifestations in systemic lupus
erythematosus. Knowledge of these lesions can help
radiologists to improve diagnostic confidence for lesions
with characteristic radiological appearance and avoid
unnecessary biopsy or surgery.
REFERENCES
1. Rafferty EA, Durand MA, Conant EF, Copit DS, Friedewald SM, Plecha DM, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis
and digital mammography in dense and nondense breasts. JAMA.
2016;315:1784-6. Crossref
2. Zackrisson S, Lang K, Rosso A, Johnson K, Dustler M, Förnvik D, et al. One-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view
mammography in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening
Trial (MBTST): a prospective, population-based, diagnostic
accuracy study. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:1493-503. Crossref
3. Fung WY, Fung EP, Kwok KM, Chan SK, Wong LK, Mak WS, et al. Tomosynthesis-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy of
sonographically occult non-calcified breast lesions detected on
tomosynthesis. Hong Kong J Radiol. 2021;24:287-94. Crossref
4. Kuhl CK. Abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for breast cancer screening: rationale, concept, and transfer to clinical practice. Annu Rev Med. 2019;70:501-19. Crossref
5. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, Schild HH, Hilgers RD, Bieling HB. Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity
projection — a novel approach to breast cancer screening with
MRI. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2304-10. Crossref
6. Kim YJ. Diagnostic accuracy of unenhanced abbreviated diffusion-weighted
magnetic resonance imaging versus postcontrast
abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer.
Hong Kong J Radiol. 2021;24:238-46. Crossref
7. Kapoor MM, Patel MM, Scoggins ME. The wire and beyond: recent advances in breast imaging preoperative needle localization.
Radiographics 2019;39:1886-906. Crossref
8. Wong WL, Wong LK, Fung EP, Kwok KM, Mak WS, Lam HS. Factors affecting accuracy of stereotactic radioisotope-guided
occult lesion localisation for breast lesions. Hong Kong J Radiol.
2021;24:279-86. Crossref
9. Tsui HL, Fung EP, Kwok KM, Wong LK, Lo LW, Mak WS. Magnetic marker wireless localisation versus radioguided
localisation of nonpalpable breast lesions. Hong Kong J Radiol.
2021;24:247-56. Crossref
10. Chan RL, Wong T, Fung WY, Chan TS, Chau CM, Lui CY, et al. Sonographic and mammographic features of different echogenic breast lesions: a pictorial essay. Hong Kong J Radiol. 2021;24:295-306. Crossref
11. Chow DL, Wong T, Chau CM, Chan RL, Chan TS, Lui DC, et al. Breast manifestations in patients with systemic lupus
erythematosus. Hong Kong J Radiol. 2021;24:257-69. Crossref