Annual Screening with Breast Ultrasound or MRI Could Benefit Some Women

Results of a large-scale clinical trial presented presented at the 95th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) provide the first strong evidence of the benefit of annual screening ultrasound for women with dense breasts who are at elevated risk for breast cancer. In addition, the study confirmed that MRI is highly sensitive in depicting early breast cancer.

"We found that annual screening with ultrasound in addition to mammography significantly improves the detection of early breast cancer," said lead researcher Wendie A. Berg, M.D., Ph.D., breast imaging specialist at American Radiology Services, Johns Hopkins — Green Spring Station in Lutherville, Md., "and that significantly more early breast cancer can be found when MRI is performed, even after combined screening with both ultrasound and mammography. However, both ultrasound and MRI increase the risk of false-positive findings."

Women who are at high risk for breast cancer need to begin screening at a younger age, because they often develop cancer earlier than women at average risk. However, women below age 50 are more likely to have dense breast tissue, which can limit the effectiveness of mammography as a screening tool.

Multicenter trials have shown that MRI enables radiologists to accurately identify tumors missed by mammography and ultrasound. The American Cancer Society recommends that some groups of women with a high risk of developing breast cancer should be screened with MRI in addition to their yearly mammogram beginning at age 30. However, MRI is not for everyone.

"Because MRI is a very expensive test and requires intravenous contrast, it is something we only recommend for screening the approximately 2% of women who are known or likely carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations or have other unusual circumstances that put them at very high risk for breast cancer," Dr. Berg said.

"There are another 10 to 15% of women who are at some increased risk because of personal history of breast cancer, family history of breast cancer and/or dense breast tissue," she added. "For many of these women, MRI is not currently justified, but annual ultrasound would be appropriate in addition to mammography."

Fig 1. This breast MRI showing focus of enhancement in left breast, negative on mammography and screening ultrasound. Pathology proven infiltrating ductal carcinoma

The researchers studied 612 women, mean age 55 years, at elevated risk of breast cancer enrolled at 14 sites in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666 trial funded by the Avon Foundation and the National Cancer Institute. Women underwent baseline screening mammography and ultrasound with follow-up exams at 12 and 24 months and then a single, contrast-enhanced MRI at 24 months.

Sixteen women were diagnosed with breast cancer. Twelve of the cancers were invasive, and four were ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Over the course of the study, 50 to 56 percent of cancers were shown on mammography. Adding ultrasound allowed detection of 70 to 94% of cancers. Adding MRI allowed for detection of additional cancers at their earliest stage.

Fig 2. Ultrasound showing 9-mm benign mass (arrows) in upper inner quadrant

The study also found that supplemental screening with ultrasound or MRI significantly increased the risk of false-positive findings, leading to unnecessary biopsies in some women.

"It is important that women are advised of the increased potential of undergoing an unnecessary biopsy as a result of screening with ultrasound or MRI," Dr. Berg said, "but we hope this study motivates women and their doctors to learn more about their risk factors and to consider supplemental screening in addition to mammography where indicated."

Also see Abstracts:
Supplemental Yield and Performance Characteristics of Screening MRI after Combined Ultrasound and Mammography: ACRIN* 6666 *American College of Radiology Imaging Network.

Reduction in Breast Density Predicts Potential Benefit of Tamoxifen

A reduction in breast density appears to be one of the strongest indicators of a woman’s response to tamoxifen (Nolvadex®, Istubal®, Valodex®, AstraZeneca, 15 Stanhope Gate , W1K 1LN, United Kingdom), an orally active selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM) that is used treat and to decrease breast cancer risk. This is one of the conclusions of a study by a team of British researchers led by Jack Cuzick, Ph.D., the study’s lead investigator and head of the Cancer Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Mathematics and Statistics in London, United Kingdom, presented at the 31 Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) in San Antonio, Texas (December 10 – 14, 2008).

The result of this study may lead to a re-evaluation of the importance of breast density, which is far the most undervalued and underutilized risk factor for breast cancer. Commenting on the study, Cuzick said that ‘Apart from age and BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, increased breast density is the leading risk factor for breast cancer.’

Density is a factor
Because of the differences in tissue composition and differences in the radiographic attenuation properties of fat, stroma, and epithelium, mammographic appearance of the breast varies among women.

In a study published in the January 2004 edition of Radiology, the journal of the Radiological society of North America, Dr Jennifer A. Harvey, MD and Dr Viktor E. Bovbjerg, PhD of the Departments of Radiology and Health Evaluation Sciences, of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville say that a plausible explanation of the association of breast density with increased breast cancer risk is the development of premalignant lesions such as atypical ductal hyperplasia, levated growth factors, or increased estrogen production within the breast due to overactive aromatase. The amount of breast density may also be due in part to genetic heredity.

Harvey and Bovbjerg noted that, unlike other risk factors, breast density may be influenced. 'Because breast density is very hormonally responsive, it may be influenced by lifestyle factors such as alcohol intake and diet,' Harvey explained. 'Breast density may reflect increased risk due to other causes or it may be an independent risk factor,' she continued. While weight, body mass index, age, menopausal status, age at first birth, nulliparity, family history, hormone use, and previous breast biopsy may all influence breast density, it is consistently identified as an independent risk factor after adjustment for other variables associated with both density and breast cancer risk

A number of studies in varied settings and populations have shown that women with dense tissue in 75% or more of the breast have a risk of breast cancer four to six times as great as the risk among women with little or no dense tissue. Based on this and other observations, Dr Karla Kerlikowske, MD, of the University of California in San Francisco, suggested, in an editorial in the January 2007 edition of the New England Journal of Medicine, that breast density should be measured in clinical practice and used to maximize primary and secondary prevention of cancer.

A Biomarker
However, for mammographic density to be considered as a biomarker, it is necessary to demonstrate that the risk reduction induced by a preventive intervention can be predicted by change in density, and that patients experiencing the largest change are most likely to benefit from treatment. Cuzick said that if their findings are validated in follow-up studies, women at risk for developing breast cancer should have a baseline mammogram before starting use of tamoxifen, and then a follow-up scan a year or two later to monitor breast density.

‘If there is a reduction, the agent is having an effect; if density is the same, it may not be a beneficial drug for the individual woman,' Cuzick noted. ‘It is important to find a way to predict who will respond to tamoxifen, and changes in breast density may constitute an early indicator of benefit,' he continued. ‘This is important to know because other preventive options now exist or are being tested.’

IBIS-1 and tamoxifen
Cuzick also led the International Breast Intervention Study I (IBIS-I), an international trial in which postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer were given tamoxifen to see how effective this drug is in preventing them from developing the disease. This trial involved more than 7,000 participants.

‘In the IBIS-1 study, tamoxifen reduced the risk of breast cancer by about 40%,’ Cuzick explained. In this study, we focus on whether the change in breast density after 12-18 months of prophylactic treatment predicts the subsequent impact of tamoxifen on the development of breast cancer.

Results of this study found the agent reduces the risk of estrogen-positive (ER) breast cancer by 30 to 40% among women at high risk. During that study, researchers collected baseline mammograms, as well as mammograms at 18, 36, and 54 months to check for breast cancer development. Based on analysis of these mammograms, Cuzick and his colleagues later found a strong correlation between reduction of breast density in women who use tamoxifen and lowered breast cancer risk. But for the rest of the women - where tamoxifen did not reduce breast density – risk of the disease was not significantly reduced.

In this follow-up study, the investigators examined a subpopulation of the IBIS-I participants (120 women who developed breast cancer and 943 who didn’t), to see if their mammograms changed over time and if tamoxifen treatment reduced breast density. They also looked at changes in other variables, such as hormone status, body weight and familial factors. They found that only change in mammographic density predicted reduction of risk for ER-positive breast cancer.

Confirmation required
For the 46 percent of women in the tamoxifen-treatment group whose breast density was reduced by 10 percent or more, the risk of breast cancer was reduced by 52 percent relative to the control group (women who did not develop breast cancer). Conversely, the 54 percent of women whose density was not reduced by 10 percent only had a non-significant, 8 percent reduction in breast cancer risk. The findings suggest that the impact of tamoxifen on risk reduction is predictable by changes it induces on breast density after 12 to 18 months of treatment, Cuzick said.

Although these findings need confirmation in an independent study, based on this data, Cuzick and his team concluded that changes in breast density may constitute an early indicator of treatment efficacy, which would be useful for the evaluation of new chemoprevention therapies. They also believe that by measuring density changes between baseline and initial follow up mammograms in high-risk patients receiving tamoxifen, it may be possible to determine which women are actually benefiting from the intervention (and should therefore continue treatment), and those who might benefit more from alternative risk reducing strategies.

A step towards personalized medicine
Researchers at the Cancer Research UK Cambridge Research Institute recently discovered the mechanism by which tamoxifen operates in breast cancer patients and how some women build up resistance to the drug.

Dr Lesley Walker, PhD., Cancer Research UK's director of cancer information, said: ‘Tamoxifen has been a huge success story helping to prevent breast cancer recurring for many women. Understanding why it occasionally stops working is really important because it allows us to identify new targets for drug development and who will need such treatments.’

Commenting on the importance of this study, she added: ‘We are moving into an era of personalised medicine and now, Professor's Cuzick's work has increased our knowledge of which high risk women will benefit from tamoxifen as a preventative drug, and which women won't benefit. This is a key advance as we try to ensure women get the most suitable treatment.’

For more information, read:

• Cuzick J, Warwick J, Pinney L, Warren R, et al. Change in breast density as a biomarker of breast cancer risk reduction; results from IBIS-1. (General Session 6) Abstract 61 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. Contact the author.

For additional information:

• Understanding Cancer Series: Estrogen Receptors/SERMs (National Cancer Institute)
• Nolvadex® full prescribing information

Also read PubMed abstracts:

• Cuzick J, Forbes JF, Sestak I, Cawthorn S, et al. Long-term results of tamoxifen prophylaxis for breast cancer--96-month follow-up of the randomized IBIS-I trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Feb 21;99(4):272-82.
• Poweles TJ, Ashley S, Tidy A, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of the Royal Marsden randomized, double-blinded tamoxifen breast cancer prevention trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Feb 21;99(4):283-90 Contact the author.
• Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun L, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007 Jan 18;356(3):227-36. Contact the author. Full text article (PDF).
• Kerlikowske K. The mammogram that cried Wolfe. N Engl J Med. 2007 Jan 18;356(3):297-300.
• Vachon CM, van Gils CH, Sellers TA, Ghosh K et al. Mammographic density, breast cancer risk and risk prediction Breast Cancer. Res. 2007;9(6):217. Contact the author.
• McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a metaanalysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:1159-69 Contact the author.
• Boyd NF, Rommens JM, Vogt K, et al. Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 2005;6:798-808.
• Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology 2004;230:29-41 Contact the author. Full text article.
• Ursin G, Ma H, Wu AH, et al. Mammographic density and breast cancer in three ethnic groups. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers. Prev 2003;12:332-8.
• Byrne C, Schairer C, Brinton LA, et al. Effects of mammographic density and benign breast disease on breast cancer risk (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2001;12:103-10.
• Duncan JA, Reeves JR, Cooke TG. BRCA1 and BRCA2 proteins: roles in health and disease. Mol Pathol. 1998 Oct;51(5):237-47.
• Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, et al. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87:670-5.
• Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, et al. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1622-9.
• Wolfe JN, Saftlas AF, Salane M. Mammographic parenchymal patterns and quantitative evaluation of mammographic densities: a case-control study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987;148:1087-92.

New Mammography Technology Effective in Detecting Breast Cancer

Positron emission mammography or PEM, a new technique for imaging the breast, is not affected by either breast density or a woman’s hormonal status, two factors that limit the effectiveness of standard mammography and MRI at detecting cancer, according to a study presented during the 94th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting (November 30 – December 5, 2008) of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) on Tuesday.

“The ability of positron emission mammography or PEM to detect cancer does not appear to be adversely affected by breast density, hormone replacement therapy or menopausal status,” explained the lead researcher Kathy Schilling, M.D., director of breast imaging and intervention at the Center for Breast Care at Boca Raton Community Hospital in Florida. “The sensitivity of PEM is equal to or better than breast MRI, and PEM has fewer false-positive results.”

The ability of x-ray mammography, a standard screening tool for breast cancer, to detect lesions is reduced when performed on dense breasts, where tissue is less fatty and more glandular. Breast MRI is effective at detecting cancer in dense breasts and is increasingly being used to screen women at high risk for breast cancer. However, MRI has a high incidence of false-positive test results that indicate cancer is present when it is not. Researchers believe these false positives are due in part to hormonal changes that occur during a woman’s menstrual cycle.

“Unless the MRI is performed on day seven through 14 of a woman’s cycle, reading MRI images is extremely difficult,” Dr. Schilling said. “This is a significant problem with breast MRI.” Because hormones do not have the same effect on PEM results, Dr. Schilling believes the imaging technique could play a significant role both in preoperatively evaluating breast cancer patients and in screening high-risk patients.

In the study, 208 patients with breast cancer underwent PEM, an application of high-resolution breast positron emission tomography (PET) in which a small amount of radioactive material is injected into the body to measure metabolic activity and determine the presence of disease. The researchers used a PET unit specially developed for the breast and small body parts to perform the PEM exam.

Of 189 malignant lesions imaged, PEM detected 176 for an overall sensitivity rate of 93 percent. Fifteen percent were ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a noninvasive cancer confined to the ducts of the breast; 85 percent were invasive cancer.

PEM successfully detected cancer in 100 percent of fatty breasts, 93 percent of dense breasts, 85 percent of extremely dense breasts, 93 percent of women both with and without a history of hormone replacement therapy, 90 percent of pre-menopausal women and 94 percent of post-menopausal women.

According to Dr. Schilling, PEM is well tolerated by patients, who sit upright during the exam and are not alone or closely confined as they would be during an MRI exam. While breast MRI exams produce more than 2,000 images to be interpreted, PEM produces just 48 images that can be correlated with a woman’s mammogram.

“PEM is easier to use, easier to interpret and easier on the patients than MRI,” Dr. Shilling said. “It is also ideal for those patients whose MRI is difficult to interpret due to hormonal influences, women with implants, patients with metal in their bodies, or patients who suffer from claustrophobia. It is exciting that we now have a functional imaging approach with high sensitivity that complements our current anatomic imaging modalities,” she added.

Positron Emission Mammography at a Glance

• Positron emission mammography (PEM) is an effective tool for detecting breast cancer.
• Dense breast tissue and hormonal status can hinder other breast imaging techniques.
• PEM shows high sensitivity and is not limited by these factors.
• PEM, also known as high-resolution breast PET, has fewer false-positive results than breast MRI.
  

Click here to read the abstract (Effect of Breast Density, Menopausal Status, and Hormone Use in High Resolution Positron Emission Mammography).

New Imaging Technology Targets Hard-to-Detect Breast Cancers

Breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) is effective in the detection of cancers generally not found on mammograms or by clinical exam, according to a study presented at the 94th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting (November 30 - December 5, 2008) of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) in Chicago on Wednesday.

"Breast-specific gamma imaging can help us to identify invasive lobular carcinoma, one of the most difficult to detect breast cancers," explained lead author Rachel F. Brem, M.D., professor of radiology and director of the Breast Imaging and Interventional Center at The George Washington University Medical Center in Washington, D.C. "It also can help us detect additional lesions of all types of breast cancer in women whose mammograms show only one suspicious lesion."


According to the American Cancer Society, breast cancer affects more women than any other non-skin cancer and accounts for more than 40,000 deaths annually in the U.S. Most experts agree that the best way to decrease breast cancer mortality is through early detection using mammography and clinical breast exam. However, some cancers are difficult to detect with mammography and clinical exam, particularly in the earliest stage when treatment is most effective.

While mammography findings are characterized by the difference in appearance between normal and suspicious breast tissue, breast-specific gamma imaging findings are based on how cancerous cells function.

"It is this physiological approach to breast cancer diagnosis that allows for improved cancer detection," Dr. Brem explained.

Breast-specific gamma imaging is an emerging technology using a high-resolution gamma camera that allows for imaging with very mild compression of the breast along with an injection of a low-dose nuclear material called a radiotracer, which is absorbed by the cells. Because cancerous cells have a higher rate of metabolic activity, the tracer is taken up by these cells at a higher level than in normal cells.

Dr. Brem and colleagues reviewed the records of 159 women with at least one suspicious or cancerous lesion found by mammography or physical exam, who had undergone breast-specific gamma imaging to determine if additional lesions were present.

The results showed an additional suspicious lesion missed by mammography and physical exam in 46 (29 percent) of the women. In 14 (36 percent) of the 39 women who underwent biopsy, the newly discovered lesions were cancerous.

"The data suggest that this new tool allows for the diagnosis of more and earlier breast cancers," Dr. Brem said.

Dr. Brem pointed out that breast-specific gamma imaging is not meant to replace mammography, but to be used as an adjunct to mammography. "It is an excellent tool for locating difficult-to-detect cancers and for screening high-risk women who have normal mammograms and physical examination," she said.

Breast-specific gamma imaging at a Glance:

• An effective method of detecting hard-to-find breast cancers
• Can identify cancer not visible on mammograms and not found by clinical examination
• The technology is based on the metabolic activity of cancer cells
  

Click here for the abstract (Breast Specific Gamma Imaging in Women with One Suspicious or Cancerous Breast Lesion)