Maimone, Santo

Abstract The practice of formally documenting radiologic and pathologic concordance after percutaneous breast biopsies was instituted more than 20 years ago. There are several ways in which this can be done, but in many practices the performing radiologist independently compares the imaging findings with the pathology report to determine concordance. However, some studies show that a multidisciplinary review of breast biopsy results can maximize cancer detection, identify discordant cases in a timely manner, decrease imaging follow-up, and avoid unnecessary surgical intervention. This article will propose a practical method to establish a formal radiology-pathology conference in which percutaneous breast biopsies are reviewed with multidisciplinary input to increase efficiency and improve patient care. With the wide implementation of digital radiologic imaging and digital pathology evaluation plus the recent adoption of virtual meeting platforms, a successful radiology-pathology conference can be implemented in nearly any practice setting. Case examples will be presented demonstrating the utility of such a conference.

Abstract Over the last 30 years, axillary surgery in patients with breast cancer has undergone a consistent patient-centered, evidence-based de-escalation of surgical intervention, including considerable practice changes over the last decade. As surgical approaches change, the role of breast imaging radiologists and axillary imaging must also evolve. Axillary imaging remains variable across radiology practices, with implementation of new protocols occurring at various speeds. Breast radiologists must be aware of recent trials and remain agile in adopting or responding to changing treatment paradigms. Breakthrough studies, such as the SOUND (Sentinel Node Vs Observation After Axillary Ultra-souND) trial, must be vetted and evaluated by individual practices before adoption. Breast radiologists should play a key role in multidisciplinary collaboration with colleagues involved in breast cancer care to assist with strategic planning and appropriate resource utilization.

e12615 Background: Breast MRI after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has demonstrated high sensitivity and positive predictive value in evaluating response to NAC. It is widely recognized as the most accurate imaging technique for assessing tumor response, outperforming mammography and ultrasound. However, there remains a knowledge gap in its potential as an early predictor of pathological response, when performed at the midpoint of NAC. Here, we investigated the correlation between MRI findings at the midpoint of NAC and subsequent pathological response at definitive surgery. Methods: A retrospective study was performed of patients with breast cancer who received NAC at Mayo Clinic, Florida and had at least 2 breast MRIs, one at midpoint and one either pre- or post-treatment. Patients with prior ipsilateral breast cancer were excluded. Participants were stratified into three molecular subtypes: hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-positive (HER2+), and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). All MRIs were re-reviewed by dedicated breast radiologists, with tumor response classified as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), or progressive disease (PD) based on RECIST criteria. Pathological outcomes, including pathologic complete response (pCR) and residual cancer burden (RCB), were extracted from pathology reports and confirmed by a single breast pathologist, as indicated. pCR was defined as the absence of residual invasive tumor in both the breast and axillary lymph nodes. Results: A total of 154 patients met inclusion criteria from 2012 to 2022. Similar to previous studies, the positive predictive value for the post-treatment MRI was high at 82.4%, with 14 of 17 patients with imaging complete responses (iCR) achieving pCR. For the midpoint MRI, the positive predictive value for patients with iCR was 100%, with 8 out of 8 patients achieving pCR. Patients with certain subtypes of breast cancer with at least PR in both breast and axillary lymph nodes at midpoint MRI had numerically higher pCR rate, specifically HER2+ (22/37, 59.5%) and TNBC (8/13, 61.5%) but not HR+ tumors (12/45, 26.7%). In contrast, patients with less than PR in either breast or axillary lymph nodes showed numerically lower rate pCR in TNBC (7/18, 38.9%) and HR+ tumors (3/18, 16.7%). However, 15/23 (65.2%) patients with HER2+ tumors achieved pCR despite having less than PR at midpoint MRI. Conclusions: Midpoint breast MRI may serve as an early predictor of pathological response, particularly in patients with iCR. Patients with less than PR, especially those with HR+ and TNBC, have lower chances of achieving pCR. These findings highlight the importance of considering additional therapies for these subgroups of patients to improve the treatment outcomes, as they are less likely to achieve pCR with the current standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen.

Abstract Breast image-guided procedures play a critical role in the diagnosis and management of breast cancer, serving as the gold standard for tissue sampling and preoperative localization. These minimally invasive procedures carry a very low risk of complications, with postprocedural infections occurring in fewer than 0.2% of cases. However, given the high volume of breast interventions performed annually, the potential impact of infections remains significant. Despite this, published guidelines addressing procedural cleanliness techniques in breast imaging are sparse and often provide conflicting recommendations, leading to variability in clinical practice and resource utilization. The lack of clear and specific guidance creates challenges for radiologists navigating institutional policies and best practice implementation. This review synthesizes existing standards and guidelines, evaluating the supporting evidence to propose an evidence-based best practice approach for maintaining clean techniques in breast image-guided procedures. By standardizing cleanliness protocols, we aim to enhance patient care, optimize procedural success, and promote consistency across breast imaging practices.

Abstract Objective Peri-implant enhancement can be seen on contrast-enhanced breast MRI, but its association with malignancy has not been described, leading to considerable variability in assessment and recommendations by radiologists. This study evaluated imaging features, management, and outcomes of implant-related enhancement. Methods This multisite IRB-approved retrospective review queried all breast MRI reports for keywords describing peri-implant enhancement, fluid, and/or masses (plus synonymous descriptions) and implant-associated malignancies, with subsequent imaging and chart review. Peri-implant enhancement and implant features were characterized. Assessments and outcomes were evaluated via clinical and imaging follow-up, aspiration/biopsy, and/or capsulectomy to evaluate for association of peri-implant enhancement with implant-related malignancy. Results A total of 100 patients had peri-implant enhancement. Uniform thin peripheral enhancement was most common (79/100, 79%). Capsulectomy was performed in 31/100 (31%), with benign capsular fibrosis/inflammation discovered in 26/31 (83.9%). Breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma was present in 2/100 (2%), both with textured implants, while 98/100 (98%) had no implant-related malignancy. MRI recommendations varied: resume routine imaging (26/100, 26%), clinical management (18/100, 18%), follow-up MRI (17/100, 17%), MRI-directed US (17/100, 17%), aspiration/biopsy (11/100, 11%), and surgical consultation (10/100, 10%). Conclusion Peri-implant enhancement is a nonspecific imaging finding with a low malignant association, especially when seen in isolation (no associated effusion, mass, or adenopathy). Implant surface texture should be considered in management recommendations; diagnostic capsulectomy is not recommended in patients with smooth implants. Additional studies are encouraged to validate nonoperative management recommendations.

Abstract Background The current definition, prognosis, and optimal treatment (tx) for oligometastatic breast cancer (OMBC) are not fully known. With advances in multimodality breast cancer (BC) tx and overall improvement in patient (pt) outcomes, it is important to identify baseline pt factors that confer better prognosis in OMBC and assess the impact of local/regional tx and metastasis (mets)-directed tx on survival outcomes. Methods We reviewed 105 Mayo Clinic pts with OMBC (up to 5 mets) from 2003 to 2021. Pts were excluded from analysis if they were misidentified as having OMBC (n=6), did not have a primary breast mass (n=1), developed de novo BC during tx (n=1), or were lost to follow up (n=2). Categorical variables were summarized as counts. Continuous variables were reported as medians. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival and the time from diagnosis to next tx at 1, 3, and 5 years. Log-rank test was used to compare survival rates between baseline factors. Univariate Cox proportional hazards models were performed on both baseline and time-dependent factors. All tests were two-sided with p-value < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Results Total pts included were 95. Median age was 49 (range, 26-86), most (93.6%) pts were White, and 46.8% were postmenopausal. Invasive ductal carcinoma (89.5%) was the most common BC type. Median survival was 10.8 years; 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 98.9%, 87.7%, and 81%, respectively. 58 pts (61.1%) required a change in tx due to disease progression. No significant survival difference was observed in pre- vs. postmenopausal pts (p=0.71) or in groups based on hormone receptor and/or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. 47 pts (49.5%) received local/regional tx; no significant difference in survival (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.23-1.40; p=0.217) or time to next tx (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39-1.15; p=0.144) was seen in this subgroup. Of these pts, 36 (76.6%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy, 5 of whom (10.6%) also started endocrine tx preoperatively. Overall, 11/47 pts (23.4%) received neoadjuvant endocrine tx. 20 pts received systemic tx without eventual surgery, and 5 pts got palliative radiation (RT). Biopsy-confirmed mets were noted in 76 pts (80%), with bone-only mets in 50%, 30 pts (31.6%) with viscera-only mets and 7 pts (7.4%) with both bone and visceral mets. 18 pts had suspected mets on imaging but did not undergo biopsy. The hazard of death was 6.34 times higher in pts with both bone and visceral mets than those with bone-only mets (p=0.008). Pts with viscera-only mets had higher survival at 2 and 3 years than pts with bone-only or both bone and visceral mets (p=0.093). Pts with 3 mets (7/76, 7.4%) had decreased survival at 1, 2, and 3 years compared to pts with 1-2 (65/76, 85.5%) mets (p=0.6). 67 pts (70.5%) received mets-directed tx; RT alone was the most common modality (52/67, 77.6%), followed by surgery (6/67, 9%), RT plus surgery (5/67, 7.5%), and ablation alone (3/67, 4.5%). There was no significant difference in survival (HR 1.27, 95% CI (0.53, 3.07), p=0.589) or time to next tx (HR 0.95, 95% CI (0.56, 1.63), p=0.856) in pts who received mets-directed tx. Multivariate analysis was not performed because most findings were not statistically significant in univariate analysis. Conclusions We did not find any significant differences in survival based on characteristics like menopausal status or site or number of mets in pts with OMBC. There was a trend toward improved survival in pts with viscera-only mets, but this finding requires validation. Local/regional and mets-directed tx did not improve survival; however, survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was excellent in this OMBC pt population. Our study was limited by low pt numbers and heterogeneity in the pt population. Findings need validation in larger studies. Citation Format: Tanmayi Pai, Raza Zarrar, Zhongwei Peng, Zhuo Li, Lauren Cornell, Kostandinos Sideras, Rohit Rao, Alvaro Moreno-Aspitia, Saranya Chumsri, Sarah McLaughlin, James Jakub, Emmanuel gabriel, Sanjay Bagaria, Laura Vallow, Santo Maimone, Pooja Advani. Clinical Features and Survival Outcomes of Oligometastatic Breast Cancer Patients: The Mayo Clinic Experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO3-06-04.

Abstract Objective The purpose of this study is to assess the “real-world” impact of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool designed to detect breast cancer in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening exams following 12 months of utilization in a subspecialized academic breast center. Methods Following IRB approval, mammography audit reports, as specified in the BI-RADS atlas, were retrospectively generated for five radiologists reading at three locations during a 12-month time frame. One location had the AI tool (iCAD ProFound AI v2.0), and the other two locations did not. The co-primary endpoints were cancer detection rate (CDR) and abnormal interpretation rate (AIR). Secondary endpoints included positive predictive values (PPVs) for cancer among screenings with abnormal interpretations (PPV1) and for biopsies performed (PPV3). Odds ratios (OR) with two-sided 95% confidence intervals (CIs) summarized the impact of AI across radiologists using generalized estimating equations. Results Nonsignificant differences were observed in CDR, AIR, and PPVs. The CDR was 7.3 with AI and 5.9 without AI (OR 1.3, 95% CI: 0.9–1.7). The AIR was 11.7% with AI and 11.8% without AI (OR 1.0, 95% CI: 0.8–1.3). The PPV1 was 6.2% with AI and 5.0% without AI (OR 1.3, 95% CI: 0.97–1.7). The PPV3 was 33.3% with AI and 32.0% without AI (OR 1.1, 95% CI: 0.8–1.5). Conclusion Although we are unable to show statistically significant changes in CDR and AIR outcomes in the two groups, the results are consistent with prior reader studies. There is a nonsignificant trend toward improvement in CDR with AI, without significant increases in AIR.