Top

Published in:

16-10-2023 | Mammography | Breast

A bimodal nomogram as an adjunct tool to reduce unnecessary breast biopsy following discordant ultrasonic and mammographic BI-RADS assessment

Authors: Ziting Xu, Yue Lin, Jiekun Huo, Yang Gao, Jiayin Lu, Yu Liang, Lian Li, Zhouyue Jiang, Lingli Du, Ting Lang, Ge Wen, Yingjia Li

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 4/2024

Abstract

Objective

To develop a bimodal nomogram to reduce unnecessary biopsies in breast lesions with discordant ultrasound (US) and mammography (MG) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessments.

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled 706 women following opportunistic screening or diagnosis with discordant US and MG BI-RADS assessments (where one assessed a lesion as BI-RADS 4 or 5, while the other assessed the same lesion as BI-RADS 0, 2, or 3) from two medical centres between June 2019 and June 2021. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to develop the nomogram. DeLong’s and McNemar’s tests were used to assess the model’s performance.

Results

Age, MG features (margin, shape, and density in masses, suspicious calcifications, and architectural distortion), and US features (margin and shape in masses as well as calcifications) were independent risk factors for breast cancer. The nomogram obtained an area under the curve of 0.87 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.83–0.91), 0.91 (95% CI, 0.87 – 0.96), and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.86–0.98) in the training, internal validation, and external testing samples, respectively, and demonstrated consistency in calibration curves. Coupling the nomogram with US reduced unnecessary biopsies from 74 to 44% and the missed malignancies rate from 13 to 2%. Similarly, coupling with MG reduced missed malignancies from 20 to 6%, and 63% of patients avoided unnecessary biopsies. Interobserver agreement between US and MG increased from – 0.708 (poor agreement) to 0.700 (substantial agreement) with the nomogram.

Conclusion

When US and MG BI-RADS assessments are discordant, incorporating the nomogram may improve the diagnostic accuracy, avoid unnecessary breast biopsies, and minimise missed diagnoses.

Clinical relevance statement

The nomogram developed in this study could be used as a computer program to assist radiologists with detecting breast cancer and ensuring more precise management and improved treatment decisions for breast lesions with discordant assessments in clinical practice.

Key Points

• Coupling the nomogram with US and mammography improves the detection of breast cancers without the risk of unnecessary biopsy or missed malignancies.

• The nomogram increases mammography and US interobserver agreement and enhances the consistency of decision-making.

• The nomogram has the potential to be a computer program to assist radiologists in identifying breast cancer and making optimal decisions.

Available only for authorised users

Lawson MB, Bissell M, Miglioretti DL et al (2022) Multilevel factors associated with time to biopsy after abnormal screening mammography results by race and ethnicity. JAMA Oncol 8:1115–1126CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ohuchi N, Suzuki A, Sobue T et al (2016) Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anti-cancer Randomized Trial (J-START): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 387:341–348CrossRefPubMed

Rebolj M, Assi V, Brentnall A, Parmar D, Duffy SW (2018) Addition of ultrasound to mammography in the case of dense breast tissue: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 118:1559–1570CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mann RM, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PA et al (2022) Breast cancer screening in women with extremely dense breasts recommendations of the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI). Eur Radiol 32:4036–4045CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Goh JHL, Tan TL, Aziz S, Rizuana IH (2022) Comparative study of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with and without ultrasound versus breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting breast lesion. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19:759CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al (2008) Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151–2163CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Shen Y, Shamout FE, Oliver JR et al (2021) Artificial intelligence system reduces false-positive findings in the interpretation of breast ultrasound exams. Nat Commun 12(1):5645ADSCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Liu H, Zhan H, Sun D (2020) Comparison of 99mTc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions. BMC Cancer 20(1):1–8ADSCrossRef

Barba D, Leon-Sosa A, Lugo P et al (2021) Breast cancer, screening and diagnostic tools: all you need to know. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 157:103174CrossRefPubMed

10.

Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D et al (2012) Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA 307(13):1394–1404CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Qian X, Pei J, Zheng H et al (2021) Prospective assessment of breast cancer risk from multimodal multiview ultrasound images via clinically applicable deep learning. Nat Biomed Eng 5(6):522–532CrossRefPubMed

12.

Shao SH, Li CX, Yao MH, Li G, Li X, Wu R (2020) Incorporation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the differential diagnosis for breast lesions with inconsistent results on mammography and conventional ultrasound. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 74:463–473CrossRefPubMed

13.

Pu H, Zhang XL, Xiang LH et al (2019) The efficacy of added shear wave elastography (SWE) in breast screening for women with inconsistent mammography and conventional ultrasounds (US). Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 71:83–94CrossRefPubMed

14.

Luo S, Yao G, Hong Z et al (2019) Qualitative classification of shear wave elastography for differential diagnosis between benign and metastatic axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer. Front Oncol 9:533CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Kajiwara Y, Oka S, Tanaka S et al (2023) Nomogram as a novel predictive tool for lymph node metastasis in T1 colorectal cancer treated with endoscopic resection: a nationwide, multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2023.01.022CrossRefPubMed

16.

Wang XY, Cui LG, Feng J, Chen W (2021) Artificial intelligence for breast ultrasound: an adjunct tool to reduce excessive lesion biopsy. Eur J Radiol 138:109624CrossRefPubMed

17.

Raza S, Goldkamp AL, Chikarmane SA, Birdwell RL (2010) US of breast masses categorized as BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5: pictorial review of factors influencing clinical management. Radiographics 30:1199–1213CrossRefPubMed

18.

Xie Y, Zhu Y, Chai W et al (2022) Downgrade BI-RADS 4A patients using nomogram based on breast magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, and mammography. Front Oncol 12:807402CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Cai Y, Zhu C, Chen Q, Zhao F, Guo S (2021) Application of a second opinion ultrasound in breast imaging reporting and data system 4A cases: can immediate biopsy be avoided? J Int Med Res 49:675881916CrossRef

20.

Niu S, Huang J, Li J et al (2020) Application of ultrasound artificial intelligence in the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant breast lesions of BI-RADS 4A. BMC Cancer 20:1–7CrossRef

21.

Hong AS, Rosen EL, Soo MS, Baker JA (2005) BI-RADS for sonography: positive and negative predictive values of sonographic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1260–1265CrossRefPubMed

22.

Tan PS, Ali MA, Eriksson M, Hall P, Humphreys K, Czene K (2021) Mammography features for early markers of aggressive breast cancer subtypes and tumor characteristics: a population-based cohort study. Int J Cancer 148:1351–1359CrossRefPubMed

23.

Choi WJ, Han K, Shin HJ, Lee J, Kim E, Yoon JH (2021) Calcifications with suspicious morphology at mammography: should they all be considered with the same clinical significance? Eur Radiol 31:2529–2538CrossRefPubMed

24.

Rauch GM, Hobbs BP, Kuerer HM et al (2016) Microcalcifications in 1657 Patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: correlation with clinical, histopathologic, biologic features, and local recurrence. Ann Surg Oncol 23:482–489CrossRefPubMed

25.

Hofvind S, Iversen BF, Eriksen L, Styr BM, Kjellevold K, Kurz KD (2011) Mammographic morphology and distribution of calcifications in ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed in organized screening. Acta Radiol 52:481–487CrossRefPubMed

26.

Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN et al (2015) Identifying Women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer. Ann Intern Med 162:673–681CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Tagliafico AS, Calabrese M, Mariscotti G et al (2016) Adjunct screening with tomosynthesis or ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interim report of a prospective comparative trial. J Clin Oncol 34:1882–1888CrossRefPubMed

Title: A bimodal nomogram as an adjunct tool to reduce unnecessary breast biopsy following discordant ultrasonic and mammographic BI-RADS assessment
Authors: Ziting Xu
Yue Lin
Jiekun Huo
Yang Gao
Jiayin Lu
Yu Liang
Lian Li
Zhouyue Jiang
Lingli Du
Ting Lang
Ge Wen
Yingjia Li
Publication date: 16-10-2023
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Mammography
Mammography
Ultrasound
Ultrasound
Breast Cancer
Breast Cancer
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 4/2024
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10255-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

A bimodal nomogram as an adjunct tool to reduce unnecessary breast biopsy following discordant ultrasonic and mammographic BI-RADS assessment

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinical relevance statement

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinical relevance statement

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2024

Coronary computed tomography angiographic detection of in-stent restenosis via deep learning reconstruction: a feasibility study

ESR Essentials: diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma—practice recommendations by ESGAR

Longitudinal MR-based proton-density fat fraction (PDFF) and T2* for the assessment of associations between bone marrow changes and myelotoxic chemotherapy

Reproducibility of radiomics quality score: an intra- and inter-rater reliability study

To shield or not to shield: shielding may have unintended effects on patient dose in CT

CT of appendicoliths in adult appendicitis: clinical significance and characteristics of overlooked cases