Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 3/2018

01-03-2018 | Original Research

Utilization of breast cancer screening with magnetic resonance imaging in community practice

Authors: Deirdre A. Hill, Ph.D., Jennifer S. Haas, M.D., Robert Wellman, M.S., Rebecca A. Hubbard, Ph.D, Christoph I. Lee, M.D., Jennifer Alford-Teaster, M.P.H, Karen J. Wernli, Ph.D., Louise M. Henderson, Ph.D., Natasha K. Stout, Ph.D., Anna N. A. Tosteson, Sc.D, Karla Kerlikowske, M.D., Tracy Onega, Ph.D.

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 3/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Breast cancer screening with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be a useful adjunct to screening mammography in high-risk women, but MRI uptake may be increasing rapidly among low- and average-risk women for whom benefits are unestablished. Comparatively little is known about use of screening MRI in community practice.

Objective

To assess relative utilization of MRI among women who do and do not meet professional society guidelines for supplemental screening, and describe utilization according to breast cancer risk indications.

Design

Prospective cohort study conducted between 2007 and 2014.

Participants

In five regional imaging registries participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC), 348,955 women received a screening mammogram, of whom 1499 underwent screening MRI.

Main measures

Lifetime breast cancer risk (< 20% or ≥ 20%) estimated by family history of two or more first-degree relatives, and Gail model risk estimates. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System breast density and benign breast diseases also were assessed. Relative risks (RR) for undergoing screening MRI were estimated using Poisson regression.

Key results

Among women with < 20% lifetime risk, which does not meet professional guidelines for supplementary MRI screening, and no first-degree breast cancer family history, screening MRI utilization was elevated among those with extremely dense breasts [RR 2.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7–2.8] relative to those with scattered fibroglandular densities and among women with atypia (RR 7.4; 95% CI 3.9–14.3.) or lobular carcinoma in situ (RR 33.1; 95% CI 18.0–60.9) relative to women with non-proliferative disease. Approximately 82.9% (95% CI 80.8%–84.7%) of screening MRIs occurred among women who did not meet professional guidelines and 35.5% (95% CI 33.1–37.9%) among women considered at low-to-average breast cancer risk.

Conclusion

Utilization of screening MRI in community settings is not consistent with current professional guidelines and the goal of delivery of high-value care.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Stout NK, Nekhlyudov L, Li L, et al. Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011. JAMA internal medicine. 2014;174: 114-121.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Stout NK, Nekhlyudov L, Li L, et al. Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011. JAMA internal medicine. 2014;174: 114-121.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Wernli KJ, DeMartini WB, Ichikawa L, et al. Patterns of breast magnetic resonance imaging use in community practice. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174: 125-132.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Wernli KJ, DeMartini WB, Ichikawa L, et al. Patterns of breast magnetic resonance imaging use in community practice. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174: 125-132.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010;7: 18-27.CrossRefPubMed Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010;7: 18-27.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Wilt TJ, Harris RP, Qaseem A, High Value Care Task Force of the American College of P. Screening for cancer: advice for high-value care from the american college of physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162: 718-725.CrossRefPubMed Wilt TJ, Harris RP, Qaseem A, High Value Care Task Force of the American College of P. Screening for cancer: advice for high-value care from the american college of physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162: 718-725.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 2004;351: 427-437.CrossRefPubMed Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 2004;351: 427-437.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23: 8469-8476.CrossRefPubMed Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23: 8469-8476.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet. 2005;365: 1769-1778.CrossRefPubMed Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet. 2005;365: 1769-1778.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA. 2004;292: 1317-1325.CrossRefPubMed Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA. 2004;292: 1317-1325.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology. 2007;242: 698-715.CrossRefPubMed Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology. 2007;242: 698-715.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Warner E, Hill K, Causer P, et al. Prospective study of breast cancer incidence in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation under surveillance with and without magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29: 1664-1669.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Warner E, Hill K, Causer P, et al. Prospective study of breast cancer incidence in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation under surveillance with and without magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29: 1664-1669.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Bellcross CA, Leadbetter S, Alford SH, Peipins LA. Prevalence and healthcare actions of women in a large health system with a family history meeting the 2005 USPSTF recommendation for BRCA genetic counseling referral. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22: 728-735.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bellcross CA, Leadbetter S, Alford SH, Peipins LA. Prevalence and healthcare actions of women in a large health system with a family history meeting the 2005 USPSTF recommendation for BRCA genetic counseling referral. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22: 728-735.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, et al. 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. 2012;307: 1394-1404.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, et al. 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. 2012;307: 1394-1404.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Saadatmand S, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Rutgers EJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening women with familial risk for breast cancer with magnetic resonance imaging. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105: 1314-1321.CrossRefPubMed Saadatmand S, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Rutgers EJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening women with familial risk for breast cancer with magnetic resonance imaging. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105: 1314-1321.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA. 2006;295: 2374-2384.CrossRefPubMed Plevritis SK, Kurian AW, Sigal BM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging. JAMA. 2006;295: 2374-2384.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004;23: 1111-1130.CrossRefPubMed Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004;23: 1111-1130.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction. Cancer. 1994;73: 643-651.CrossRefPubMed Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction. Cancer. 1994;73: 643-651.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Antoniou AC, Cunningham AP, Peto J, et al. The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers: updates and extensions. Br J Cancer. 2008;98: 1457-1466.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Antoniou AC, Cunningham AP, Peto J, et al. The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers: updates and extensions. Br J Cancer. 2008;98: 1457-1466.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, et al. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169: 1001-1008.CrossRefPubMed Ballard-Barbash R, Taplin SH, Yankaskas BC, et al. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: a national mammography screening and outcomes database. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169: 1001-1008.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference American College of Radiology. The American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). 4th ed. Reston, VA. 2003. American College of Radiology. The American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). 4th ed. Reston, VA. 2003.
21.
go back to reference Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81: 1879-1886.CrossRefPubMed Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81: 1879-1886.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;159: 702-706.CrossRefPubMed Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;159: 702-706.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Chubak J, Pocobelli G, Weiss NS. Tradeoffs between accuracy measures for electronic health care data algorithms. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65: 343-349 e342.CrossRefPubMed Chubak J, Pocobelli G, Weiss NS. Tradeoffs between accuracy measures for electronic health care data algorithms. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65: 343-349 e342.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Hubbard RA, Kerlikowske K, Flowers CI, Yankaskas BC, Zhu W, Miglioretti DL. Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155: 481-492.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hubbard RA, Kerlikowske K, Flowers CI, Yankaskas BC, Zhu W, Miglioretti DL. Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155: 481-492.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2007;57: 75-89. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2007;57: 75-89.
27.
go back to reference Kadivar H, Goff BA, Phillips WR, Andrilla CH, Berg AO, Baldwin LM. Guideline-inconsistent breast cancer screening for women over 50: a vignette-based survey. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29: 82-89.CrossRefPubMed Kadivar H, Goff BA, Phillips WR, Andrilla CH, Berg AO, Baldwin LM. Guideline-inconsistent breast cancer screening for women over 50: a vignette-based survey. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29: 82-89.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Hendee WR, Becker GJ, Borgstede JP, et al. Addressing overutilization in medical imaging. Radiology. 2010;257: 240-245.CrossRefPubMed Hendee WR, Becker GJ, Borgstede JP, et al. Addressing overutilization in medical imaging. Radiology. 2010;257: 240-245.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Schwartz T, Cyr A, Margenthaler J. Screening breast magnetic resonance imaging in women with atypia or lobular carcinoma in situ. J Surg Res. 2015;193: 519-522.CrossRefPubMed Schwartz T, Cyr A, Margenthaler J. Screening breast magnetic resonance imaging in women with atypia or lobular carcinoma in situ. J Surg Res. 2015;193: 519-522.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Port ER, Park A, Borgen PI, Morris E, Montgomery LL. Results of MRI screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with LCIS and atypical hyperplasia. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14: 1051-1057.CrossRefPubMed Port ER, Park A, Borgen PI, Morris E, Montgomery LL. Results of MRI screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with LCIS and atypical hyperplasia. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14: 1051-1057.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Friedlander LC, Roth SO, Gavenonis SC. Results of MR imaging screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with lobular carcinoma in situ. Radiology. 2011;261: 421-427.CrossRefPubMed Friedlander LC, Roth SO, Gavenonis SC. Results of MR imaging screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with lobular carcinoma in situ. Radiology. 2011;261: 421-427.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Sung JS, Malak SF, Bajaj P, Alis R, Dershaw DD, Morris EA. Screening breast MR imaging in women with a history of lobular carcinoma in situ. Radiology. 2011;261: 414-420.CrossRefPubMed Sung JS, Malak SF, Bajaj P, Alis R, Dershaw DD, Morris EA. Screening breast MR imaging in women with a history of lobular carcinoma in situ. Radiology. 2011;261: 414-420.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Moore SG, Shenoy PJ, Fanucchi L, Tumeh JW, Flowers CR. Cost-effectiveness of MRI compared to mammography for breast cancer screening in a high risk population. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9: 9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Moore SG, Shenoy PJ, Fanucchi L, Tumeh JW, Flowers CR. Cost-effectiveness of MRI compared to mammography for breast cancer screening in a high risk population. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009;9: 9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
go back to reference Taneja C, Edelsberg J, Weycker D, Guo A, Oster G, Weinreb J. Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening with contrast-enhanced MRI in high-risk women. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6: 171-179.CrossRefPubMed Taneja C, Edelsberg J, Weycker D, Guo A, Oster G, Weinreb J. Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening with contrast-enhanced MRI in high-risk women. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6: 171-179.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM, et al. Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology. 2010;254: 79-87.CrossRefPubMed Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM, et al. Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology. 2010;254: 79-87.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162: 673-681.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162: 673-681.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Utilization of breast cancer screening with magnetic resonance imaging in community practice
Authors
Deirdre A. Hill, Ph.D.
Jennifer S. Haas, M.D.
Robert Wellman, M.S.
Rebecca A. Hubbard, Ph.D
Christoph I. Lee, M.D.
Jennifer Alford-Teaster, M.P.H
Karen J. Wernli, Ph.D.
Louise M. Henderson, Ph.D.
Natasha K. Stout, Ph.D.
Anna N. A. Tosteson, Sc.D
Karla Kerlikowske, M.D.
Tracy Onega, Ph.D.
Publication date
01-03-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-017-4224-6

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

Journal of General Internal Medicine 3/2018 Go to the issue