Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27986508›Full record

ArticleAcademic radiology2017

Screening Breast MRI Outcomes in Routine Clinical Practice: Comparison to BI-RADS Benchmarks.

Roberta M Strigel, Jennifer Rollenhagen, Elizabeth S Burnside, Mai Elezaby, Amy M Fowler, Frederick Kelcz, Lonie Salkowski, Wendy B DeMartini

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Utility of Diffusion-weighted Imaging to Decrease Unnecessary Biopsies Prompted by Breast MRI: A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (A6702).Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2019
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Breast MRI: an illustration of benign findings.The British journal of radiology · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Screening of Breast Cancer.Radiologic clinics of North America · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2019
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Roberta M StrigelDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792; Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin; Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. Electronic address: rstrigel@uwhealth.org.
Jennifer RollenhagenDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.
Elizabeth S BurnsideDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792; Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Mai ElezabyDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.
Amy M FowlerDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792; Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin; Carbone Cancer Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.
Frederick KelczDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.
Lonie SalkowskiDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.
Wendy B DeMartiniDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53792.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI AMY TRENTHAM-DIETZ · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
TrainingU54AI117924 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CRAVEN, MARK W. · 2014 to 2018
$11.3M
Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardKL2TR000428 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$6.2M
Mentoring And Research In Patient-Oriented Breast Cancer DiagnosisK24CA194251 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BURNSIDE, ELIZABETH S · 2015 to 2019
$963k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000428NCI NIH HHS K24 CA194251NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NIAID NIH HHS U54 AI117924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE AND

objectivesThe BI-RADS Atlas 5th Edition includes screening breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcome benchmarks. However, the metrics are from expert practices and clinical trials of women with hereditary breast cancer predispositions, and it is unknown if they are appropriate for routine practice. We evaluated screening breast MRI audit outcomes in routine practice across a spectrum of elevated risk patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis Institutional Review Board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant retrospective study included all consecutive screening breast MRI examinations from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2013. Examination indications were categorized as gene mutation carrier (GMC), personal history (PH) breast cancer, family history (FH) breast cancer, chest radiation, and atypia/lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS). Outcomes were determined by pathology and/or ≥12 months clinical and/or imaging follow-up. We calculated abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), cancer detection rate (CDR), positive predictive value of recommendation for tissue diagnosis (PPV2) and biopsy performed (PPV3), and median size and percentage of node-negative invasive cancers.

resultsEight hundred and sixty examinations were performed in 566 patients with a mean age of 47 years. Indications were 367 of 860 (42.7%) FH, 365 of 860 (42.4%) PH, 106 of 860 (12.3%) GMC, 14 of 860 (1.6%) chest radiation, and 8 of 22 (0.9%) atypia/LCIS. The AIR was 134 of 860 (15.6%). Nineteen cancers were identified (13 invasive, 4 DCIS, two lymph nodes), resulting in CDR of 19 of 860 (22.1 per 1000), PPV2 of 19 of 88 (21.6%), and PPV3 of 19 of 80 (23.8%). Of 13 invasive breast cancers, median size was 10 mm, and 8 of 13 were node negative (61.5%).

conclusionsPerformance outcomes of screening breast MRI in routine clinical practice across a spectrum of elevated risk patients met the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System benchmarks, supporting broad application of these metrics. The indication of a personal history of treated breast cancer accounted for a large proportion (42%) of our screening examinations, with breast MRI performance in this population at least comparable to that of other screening indications.

Indexed as

BreastBreast Carcinoma In SituBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, LobularEarly Detection of CancerMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAgedBenchmarkingBiopsyFemaleHumansMedical AuditMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsRetrospective StudiesbenchmarksoutcomesScreening breast MRI

Identifiers

PMID27986508
PMCPMC5339052
OpenAlexW2564408362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.