| New
guidelines from the American Cancer Society [1] recommending
annual breast MRI for high-risk women are expected to
result in significantly expanded demand for the study.
Robert Smith, director for screening at the American
Cancer Society, estimated that the new guidelines would
add between 1 million and 2 million women a year to
the number who should have breast MRI in the United
States, according to an
article in the New York Times. [2] In order to participate
in the delivery of care, imaging centers must institute
stringent new technical standards, invest in MR-compatible
biopsy equipment, initiate training for radiologists
and technologists, and, in some cases, implement more
empathic patient interaction protocols.
Even before the new guidelines were released in March,
ProScan Imaging (PSI), a Cincinnati-based network of
25 freestanding imaging centers in 11 Eastern states
and one of the largest teleradiology providers in the
world, reported a threefold increase in the number of
breast MRs read via teleradiology in the past year and
10 of its centers had already begun providing the examination.
Stephen J. Pomeranz, M.D., CEO and medical director
of PSI, has read approximately 7,000 breast MRs during
the past five years and was not at all surprised by
the announcement of the ACS’s new recommendations.
“I have had the opportunity, first-hand, to appreciate
the power of breast MR, especially in women who have
tougher breasts to evaluate on x-ray,” Pomeranz
said.
The Patient Pool
In addition to imaging women with the high-risk characteristics
described in the new
ACS guidelines, Pomeranz has promoted breast MR
as an important tool in:
- breast cancer staging,
- imaging younger women with dense breasts,
- imaging small-breasted women with dense breasts,
- imaging women with indeterminate mammograms over
a period of time, and
- imaging women with breast implants
Breast MR plays a particularly valuable role in staging
breast cancer patients, Pomeranz said. “One study,
from the University of Pennsylvania’s Abramson
Cancer Center three years ago, showed that between 24%
and 27% of all women who had MR for staging actually
had their treatment management changed by the MR,”
he said. “That’s a big number. We’ve
known for quite some time that the size of the cancer
and the presence of more than one cancer are often underestimated
dramatically by mammography. So this could impact a
woman’s decision to have a lumpectomy or mastectomy,
as well as the various types of supplemental therapy.”

A
new study published in the May issue of the Archives
of Surgery found that the use of breast MRI resulted
in a 9.7% beneficial change in the surgical management
of patients, with a 23.2% overall change. Lumpectomy
was converted to mastectomy in 10 patients (8 beneficial),
wider excision was performed in 21 patients (10 beneficial),
and 5 patients (2 beneficial) underwent contralateral
surgery.
The March publication of an ACRIN study in the New England
Journal of Medicine [4] also helped to build the case
for breast MR in women recently diagnosed with breast
cancer. Results showed that breast MR detected twice
the number of cancers as mammography in the contralateral
breast of women with a recent diagnosis of breast cancer.
Sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and conducted
by the American College of Radiology Imaging Network,
the
study reinforces the suggestion that breast MR should
be performed on all breast cancer patients prior to
treatment planning.
Another category of women who may benefit from breast
MR is women with indeterminate mammograms over a period
of time. “We usually educate their physicians
about the role of MR,” explained Pomeranz. “And,
most importantly, we educate their physicians about
how important MR can be in those situations where cancers
can be tough to detect, the kind of in-between cases
in which the woman has some moderate risk and a screening
study that is just not adequate because the technology
cannot overcome the limitation of the breast configuration:
the size and the density. That occurs with enough frequency
to make MR very important.”
Breast implants provide one of the foremost indications
for breast MR, as mammography can be tough to interpret
because of the density of the implant, Pomeranz said.
The technology is appropriate for the following implant
indications: a mass, cancer, implant rupture, pain,
implant getting bigger, and implant getting smaller.
“There are some other areas where MR has a tremendous
impact, but they are more on the research side at this
point, such as looking at the response to chemotherapy
or radiation, which MR does very well.”
Technical Challenges
Imaging centers interested in adding breast MR as a
service should know that there are considerable technical
challenges in performing the study, and that technologists
will need to be mentored or trained carefully. “It
requires a tremendous amount of coordination between
the physician and the technologist, and unlike many
MSK studies, it uses contrast in almost every case,”
explained Pomeranz.
In addition to precise timing of contrast delivery,
technologists and radiologists must ensure reproducibility
from one study to the next by using similar positioning
and protocols, because for a study to be used in diagnosis
it must appear very similar to the previous study.
Patient compliance is also very important. “The
study is based on the use of image subtraction,”
explained Pomeranz. “To have a good subtraction,
you need a very cooperative, comfortable patient who
is positioned well and will stay there for the time
needed to get the study done.”
Pomeranz said breast MR studies average 50 to 55 minutes
to acquire, but can take as little as 30 minutes and
as much as an hour and 20 minutes, depending on the
clinical problem. ProScan Imaging (PSI) engages in continuous
mentoring, shares protocols across its 10 facilities
performing breast MR, and involves its most experienced
technologists when the study is initially introduced
at a facility.
Mammographers and MRI subspecialists are both interested
in reading breast MRI. The best approach, suggested
Pomeranz, is collaboration between the two. “Mammographers
have an incredible background in breast care, understand
the morphologic side of things, and are able to integrate
clinical information quite well with imaging information
because they have been doing it for so many years,”
he said. “And then you have the imagers who have
been doing MR for quite some time. They have the understanding
of the physics, the pulsing sequences, the performance
of the study, the pitfalls, the artifacts, and all of
the variables that go into an MR study -- which is unlike
a CT or an X-ray for many of those reasons.”
Pomeranz recommended that the novice breast MR radiologist
be proctored on the first 25 to 50 cases. “But
nothing beats getting with someone who knows and has
had experience reading MR of breast itself, reading
shoulder to shoulder with them, seeing how it is done,”
he added.
At PSI, the MR mammography reading pool is limited to
a small group so the level of reading expertise is high
and very specialized. “The more you see,”
noted Pomeranz, “the better you are.”
Until recently, Pomeranz noted, the data have shown
that the specificity of MR is no greater than mammography,
but the specificity of the study improves with the experience
of the reader. “We have reduced the number of
biopsies that are negative for cancer by about a quarter,”
he said. “So we have been able to eliminate a
significant number of biopsies and that number continues
to gradually decline. As we have improved our knowledge
base, we have decreased the number of negative biopsies,
and in that way I think we have made a major contribution
medically and economically. That comes after you have
seen 1,000 or 2,000 cases and you begin to develop a
strong pattern recognition library, mentally and visually,
and really integrate the women’s health care knowledge
base with the MR knowledge base.”
Field Strength Remains Controversial
The issue of technology and field strength continues
to be controversial, according to Pomeranz. “The
technical requirements really revolve more around the
technologists and the understanding of the examination
than anything else,” Pomeranz said. “You
can perform a quality breast implant MR at any field
strength; it doesn’t matter what the field strength
is. It is helpful to have stronger gradients when you
are doing cancer imaging, because you can scan faster.
But from about .7 Tesla on up, and performed with the
proper technical modifications, very high quality breast
MR imaging is possible. I have even seen it performed
very well in the European theater at .5 T. The study
can be performed with two-dimensional imaging or three-dimensional
imaging: Two-dimensional imaging appears to work better
at mid-field or mid- to semi-high field, and the three-dimensional
technique works better at high field.”
Pomeranz said most of the 10 PSI facilities performing
breast MR are high-field facilities. “We do open
imaging only on what I call high-field open scanners,
.7 T or 1 T and above,” he said. “The only
time we’ll do low-field breast MR is for breast
implant imaging.”
In addition to having an appropriate scanner, centers
need to consider an investment in:
- A breast coil that enables the imaging of both
breasts simultaneously
- The ability to perform biopsy under MR. Otherwise
patients with a mammographically occult cancer detected
on MR will need to be re-scanned at a center that
does offer biopsy.
- CAD software, if studies are to be read at the center.
Both women’s imaging centers and MRI centers
can participate in care delivery if approached seriously
and sensitively. The MRI facility will need to become
familiar with aspects of women’s health care,
including forms of interaction with the female cancer
patient. For women’s health centers, the challenges
are primarily related to the technology and understanding
how it works.
Marketing the Study
The primary referring physician community for breast
MR includes:
- primary care physicians,
- obstetricians and gynecologists,
- breast surgeons, and
- to a lesser extent, oncologists.
Marketing at PSI is performed through what Pomeranz
describes as the most sophisticated and respected channel:
referring physician education. He does not recommend
direct consumer marketing. “By putting articles
in their hands, through talking with them one-on-one,
those age-old techniques of education, physician to
physician, are probably the best way,” Pomeranz
said. “If a patient asks a question about breast
MR, we are going to give them an honest answer. But
I think the best way for a patient to learn about this
technology is to educate their doctor and let their
doctor communicate with them as to whether it is appropriate
or not.”
Pomeranz believes the new guidelines provide a great
opportunity for imaging centers to participate in raising
the bar of care for breast cancer patients. “If
we can detect more cancers and at the same time biopsy
fewer women who don’t have cancer, we can, in
a fiscally appropriate and responsible manner, save
our agencies, insurers, and patients money by having
greater specificity,” Pomeranz said.
Through its teleradiology service, PSI’s radiologists
interpret between 10 and 20 breast MRs a day from all
over the world, from just about every type of MR equipment
made. According to Pomeranz, one of the great challenges
of breast MR is that no two machines are exactly alike.
“They may have different field strengths, gradient
strengths, protocols, software, and software versions,”
Pomeranz explained. “So the real challenge is
trying to integrate those into a thoughtful form of
interpretation that can cross those technical boundaries.”
Pomeranz has adopted the effective use of breast MR
as a personal mission, and if imaging center providers
require assistance with protocols and practices, Pomeranz
is happy to oblige. “If they e-mail me with a
question, I answer it,” said Pomeranz. “If
they call me, I answer. If it’s a safety question,
I answer it. Even when the studies look pretty good,
we’ll make suggestions to tweak them. This is
really the way medicine was meant to be practiced, with
thoughtful and friendly dialogue. It’s very rewarding.” |