Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 5/2018

01-05-2018 | Breast Oncology

Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography is Comparable to MRI in the Assessment of Residual Breast Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy

Authors: Bhavika K. Patel, MD, Talal Hilal, MD, Matthew Covington, MD, Nan Zhang, MS, Heidi E. Kosiorek, MS, Marc Lobbes, MD, PhD, Donald W. Northfelt, MD, Barbara A. Pockaj, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 5/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) compared to MRI in the assessment of tumor response in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST).

Methods

The institutional review board approved this study. From September 2014 to June 2017, we identified patients with pathologically confirmed invasive breast cancer who underwent NST. All patients had both CESM and MRI performed pre- and post-NST with pathological assessment after surgical management. Size of residual malignancy on post-NST CESM and MRI was compared with surgical pathology. Lin concordance and Pearson correlation coefficient were used to assess agreement. Bland–Altman plots were used to visualize the differences between tumor size on imaging and pathology.

Results

Sixty-five patients were identified. Mean age was 52.7 (range 30–76) years. Type of NST included chemotherapy in 53 (82%) and endocrine therapy in 12 (18%). Mean tumor size after NST was 14.6 (range 0–105) mm for CESM and 14.2 mm (range 0–75 mm) for MRI compared with 19.6 (range 0–100) mm on final surgical pathology. Equivalence tests demonstrated that mean tumor size measured by CESM (p = 0.009) or by MRI (p = 0.01) was equivalent to the mean tumor size measured by pathology within − 1 and 1-cm range. Comparing CESM versus MRI for assessment of complete response, the sensitivity was 95% versus 95%, specificity 66.7% versus 68.9%, positive predictive value 55.9% versus 57.6%, and negative predictive value 96.7% versus 96.9% respectively.

Conclusions

CESM was comparable to MRI in assessing residual malignancy after completion of NST.
Literature
1.
Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, Geyer CE Jr, Mamounas EP, Fisher B, et al. Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer:National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(13):2019–27.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Hennigs A, Riedel F, Marme F, Sinn P, Lindel K, Gondos A, et al. Changes in chemotherapy usage and outcome of early breast cancer patients in the last decade. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;160(3):491–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Mehta K, Costantino JP, Wolmark N, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384(9938):164–72.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Rosen EL, Blackwell KL, Baker JA, Soo MS, Bentley RC, Yu D, et al. Accuracy of MRI in the detection of residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(5):1275–82.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Marinovich ML, Macaskill P, Irwig L, Sardanelli F, Mamounas E, von Minckwitz G, et al. Agreement between MRI and pathologic breast tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and comparison with alternative tests: individual patient data meta-analysis. Bmc Cancer. 2015;15(1):662.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Patel BK, Lobbes MBI, Lewin J. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: a review. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2018;39(1):70–9.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F, Renz DM, Amer H, Ingold-Heppner B, et al. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: does mammography provide additional clinical benefits or can some radiation exposure be avoided? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;146(2):371–81.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Ali-Mucheru M, Pockaj B, Patel B, Pizzitola V, Wasif N, Stucky CC, et al. Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography in the Surgical Management of Breast Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(Suppl 5):649–55.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Lewis TC, Pizzitola VJ, Giurescu ME, Eversman WG, Lorans R, Robinson KA, et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: a single-institution experience of the first 208 cases. Breast J. 2017;23(1):67–76.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Lin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 1989;45(1):255–68.CrossRefPubMed
11.
van la Parra RF, Kuerer HM. Selective elimination of breast cancer surgery in exceptional responders: historical perspective and current trials. Breast Cancer Res. 2016;18(1):28.CrossRef
12.
Shin HJ, Kim HH, Ahn JH, Kim SB, Jung KH, Gong G, et al. Comparison of mammography, sonography, MRI and clinical examination in patients with locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Br J Radiol. 2011;84(1003):612–20.
13.
Iotti V, Ravaioli S, Vacondio R, Coriani C, Caffarri S, Sghedoni R, et al. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in neoadjuvant chemotherapy monitoring: a comparison with breast magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res. 2017;19(1):106.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Marinovich ML, Houssami N, Macaskill P, Sardanelli F, Irwig L, Mamounas EP, et al. Meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(5):321–33.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Marinovich ML, Macaskill P, Irwig L, Sardanelli F, von Minckwitz G, Mamounas E, et al. Meta-analysis of agreement between MRI and pathologic breast tumour size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Br J Cancer. 2013;109(6):1528–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Lobbes MB, Prevos R, Smidt M, Tjan-Heijnen VC, van Goethem M, Schipper R, et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in assessing residual disease and pathologic complete response in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review. Insights Imaging. 2013;4(2):163–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Onega T, Hubbard R, Hill D, Lee CI, Haas JS, Carlos HA, et al. Geographic access to breast imaging for US women. J Am Coll Radiol. 2014;11(9):874–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Millet I, Pages E, Hoa D, Merigeaud S, Curros Doyon F, Prat X, et al. Pearls and pitfalls in breast MRI. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1011):197–207.
19.
Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS, Heerdt AS, Thornton C, Moskowitz CS, et al. Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast carcinoma. Radiology. 2013;266(3):743–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Fallenberg EM, Schmitzberger FF, Amer H, Ingold-Heppner B, Balleyguier C, Diekmann F, et al. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation. Eur Radiol. 2016;27(7):2752–2764.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Lobbes MB, Lalji UC, Nelemans PJ, Houben I, Smidt ML, Heuts E, et al. The quality of tumor size assessment by contrast-enhanced spectral mammography and the benefit of additional breast MRI. J Cancer. 2015;6(2):144–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
Patel BK, Gray RJ, Pockaj BA. Potential Cost Savings of Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208(6):W231–W7.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Hobbs MM, Taylor DB, Buzynski S, Peake RE. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) and contrast enhanced MRI (CEMRI): patient preferences and tolerance. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2015;59(3):300–5.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Carpenter AP, Leemis LM, Papir AS, Phillips DJ, Phillips GS. Managing magnetic resonance imaging machines: support tools for scheduling and planning. Health Care Manag Sci. 2011;14(2):158–73.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography is Comparable to MRI in the Assessment of Residual Breast Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy
Authors
Bhavika K. Patel, MD
Talal Hilal, MD
Matthew Covington, MD
Nan Zhang, MS
Heidi E. Kosiorek, MS
Marc Lobbes, MD, PhD
Donald W. Northfelt, MD
Barbara A. Pockaj, MD
Publication date
01-05-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 5/2018
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6413-x

Other articles of this Issue 5/2018

Annals of Surgical Oncology 5/2018 Go to the issue

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Adjuvant Therapy Is Associated With Improved Survival in Resected Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Propensity Matched Study

Health Services Research and Global Oncology

Denis Parsons Burkitt, an Overlooked Surgical Oncologist

Colorectal Cancer

Vertical Rectus Abdominis Musculocutaneous Flap Repair Improves Perineal Wound Healing after Abdominoperineal Resection for Irradiated Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

Endocrine Tumors

Reasons Associated with Total Thyroidectomy as Initial Surgical Management of an Indeterminate Thyroid Nodule

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Neural Invasion is a Significant Contributor to Peritoneal Recurrence in Signet Ring Cell Gastric Carcinoma

Endocrine Tumors

Impact of Micro- and Macroscopically Positive Surgical Margins on Survival after Resection of Adrenocortical Carcinoma