Surveillance Mammograms Research Articles

Factors affecting mammogram breast cancer surveillance effectiveness in the ipsilateral and contralateral breast

AimMammography is the mainstay of imaging surveillance after breast cancer (BC) treatment, but false negatives can occur. The objective of the study was to determine the factors that can predict poorer second breast cancer (SBC) mammogram detection of the ipsilateral and contralateral breast separately. MethodsA multicentre retrospective review was performed on female patients with a previous history of treated BC who developed a second breast cancer (SBC) in the ipsilateral (ISBC) or contralateral breast (CSBC) within 10 years from the first BC. SBC cases that occurred between January 2006 and October 2017 were included from the institutional database. The ISBC and CSBC mammogram-occult (MO) rates were correlated with mammographic breast density as well as various clinical, radiological and histological characteristics of the first BC. Results274 cases of SBC were evaluated. 39.4 % (108/274) of cases were ISBC and 60.6 % (166/274) were CSBC. 35 (32.4 %) of the ISBCs and 42 (25.3 %) of the CSBCs were MO (p = 0.218). On multivariate analysis, symptomatic first BC (p = 0.041), prevailing dense breast tissue at the time of SBC diagnosis (p = 0.003) and trabecular thickening on surveillance mammograms (p = 0.017) were associated with MO ISBC. MO first BC (p < 0.001) was the only factor found to correlate with MO CSBC. ConclusionThe study found various clinical, radiological and pathological factors associated with mammogram surveillance failure for the ipsilateral and contralateral breast. This information can provide additional guidance in the planning of a personalised surveillance program using adjunct imaging screening.

Capturing longer term surgical outcome measures as part of routine care of breast cancer patients

IntroductionThe transition away from routine clinical follow up after breast cancer towards imaging surveillance and patient-initiated contact limits opportunities for patients and doctors to communicate about the long-term effects of treatment. The ABS oncoplastic guidelines (2021) recommend that post-operative 2D images and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) are routinely collected but give no guidance as to how best to implement this. MethodsFrom December 2019 until March 2024, women due for their year 3 or 5 surveillance mammogram at The Royal Marsden Sutton site were invited to complete a BREAST-Q questionnaire and attend medical photography. Panel assessment of photographs was undertaken. Results were presented to the oncoplastic MDT, including summary PROMs and illustrative case presentations. Free-text comments were shared with the relevant teams. Associations between demographic or clinic-pathological factors and uptake were investigated. ResultsOf the 1211 women invited, 246 patients (20.3 %) completed BREAST-Q questionnaires, 182 (15.0 %) attended for medical photography and 114 (9.4 %) completed both. Uptake was not associated with age, ethnicity or surgical factors but patients with higher BMI were less likely to respond to the questionnaire. Patients who had undergone complex oncoplastic procedures were more likely to respond than those who had simple procedures. Patient-reported outcome results were in line with the published literature. ConclusionReviewing images with their paired PROMs and discussing free-text feedback was instructive for the team. Work is needed to identify barriers to patient participation and improve uptake to be representative of the overall patient population. Quantifying appearance in photographs would help summarise aesthetic outcome data.

Evaluating the utility of routine survivorship exams in breast cancer: Modality of detection of recurrence in a prospective cohort study.

1629 Background: National Comprehensive Cancer Network surveillance guidelines for invasive breast cancer recommend a history and physical exam every 3-12 months for the first 5 years, followed by annually, and mammography every 12 months. However, frequent in-office visits create time toxicity for breast cancer survivors, may have low utility in recurrence detection, and can create false reassurance. This study evaluates the modality of breast cancer recurrence in an integrated health system with access to primary and specialty care. Methods: We investigated mode of detection of recurrent breast cancer in the Pathways Study, a prospective cohort study of adult women diagnosed with and treated for invasive breast cancer in Kaiser Permanente Northern California, with enrollment from 2006 to 2013, and follow-up through December 2021. In this analysis, we included 4,431 women diagnosed at Stages I-III. Cohort members were followed for recurrences, deaths, and other outcomes. Of primary interest was modality of detection of recurrence, categorized as patient-driven symptoms, surveillance mammogram, diagnostic testing (i.e., other surveillance imaging for recurrence such as PET CT or MRI), routine clinical breast exam, or incidental finding. Results: A total of 617 (13.9%) women were identified as having breast cancer recurrence. Patients with recurrence shared similar demographic characteristics to those without recurrence. The recurrence population had median age of 59.2 years, BMI of 28.2 kg/m2, and racial/ethnic composition of 63% white,13% Hispanic,12% Asian, and 10% black. The median time from diagnosis to recurrence was 4 years. Seventy percent of recurrences were found to have distant metastatic disease, of which only 6.7% had concurrent local nodal and/or breast involvement. For those without metastases, 17.7% had recurrence localized in the ipsilateral breast, 2.8% in both the breast and locoregional nodes, and 9.3% only in locoregional nodes. Most recurrences were detected by patient driven symptoms (69.4%). Among the total cases, 8.1% of patients were diagnosed by routine mammogram, 10.9% with diagnostic testing and 4.5% by incidental finding. Recurrences in 6.8% of patients were detected by routine physician exam. Overall survival for those with recurrence was 31.1% and most deaths were attributed to breast cancer (89%). Conclusions: Our study, the largest investigation of breast cancer recurrence modality of detection in a US community oncology setting with comprehensive care, revealed the majority of recurrences were identified through patient self-detection with only 6.8% detected by physician exam. Most recurrences were distant, underscoring the need for alternative screening modalities to detect metastatic recurrences earlier, especially in the context of emerging treatments and improved survival rates for oligometastatic disease.

Abstract GS03-02: Mammographic surveillance in early breast cancer patients aged 50 years or over: results of the Mammo-50 non-inferiority trial of annual versus less frequent mammography

Abstract Introduction: Annual surveillance mammograms for an unspecified period, after treatment for early breast cancer, are widely practised in USA and Europe and represent a significant healthcare cost. Current UK guidelines recommend annual mammograms up to 5 years, then reverts to 3 year screening without specified risk stratification. Further evidence is needed to determine the optimum frequency and duration of mammographic surveillance. Methods: A multi-centre, randomised controlled, phase III trial of annual mammography versus 2-yearly for conservation surgery and 3-yearly mammograms for mastectomy patients up to 9 years. Women were eligible if aged 50 years or over at initial diagnosis of breast cancer (invasive or DCIS), and recurrence free 3 years post curative surgery. Primary outcome was breast cancer specific survival (BCSS). Secondary outcomes include recurrence free interval (RFI) and overall survival (OS). BCSS event was defined as deaths from breast cancer and RFI as any locoregional or distant invasive recurrence or new breast primary. 5000 women were needed to detect a 3% absolute non-inferiority (NI) margin for BCSS with 2.5% one-sided alpha and at least 85% power. Analyses were carried out on intention-to-treat basis. Results: 5235 women were randomised between April 2014 and September 2018. 4347 (83%) women were aged 55-75 years, 4203 (80%) had undergone conservation surgery, 4564 (87%) had invasive disease, 1162 (22%) had node positive disease, 4330 (83%) had ER positive tumours and 3812 (73%) were taking hormone therapy at the time of randomisation. Patient characteristics were balanced across arms. With a median of 5.4 years follow-up (interquartile range 4.6-5.9), 319 women have died; 104 of breast cancer (53 on annual arm; 51 on less frequent arm). BCSS at 5 years was 98.2% (95% CI 97.5-98.6%) on annual arm and 98.3% (95% CI 97.7-98.8%) on less frequent arm. Hazard ratio (HR) was 1.04 (95% CI 0.71 -1.54), demonstrating non-inferiority of less frequent mammograms at the 3% margin (NI p&amp;lt; 0.0001; critical value 2.71) and the 1% margin (NI p=0.02; critical value 1.56). 320 (6%) women had a new invasive breast cancer event (55 loco-regional recurrences, 85 new breast primaries, 139 distant recurrences and 41 with multiple invasive events); 164 on the annual arm compared to 156 on the less frequent arm. Five-year RFI was 94.2% (95% CI 93.2-95.1%) for the annual arm and 94.4% (95% CI 93.4-95.3%) for the less frequent arm; HR= 1.03; (95% CI 0.83-1.28) demonstrating non-inferiority at a 2% margin (NI p=0.006; critical value 1.36). OS at 5 years was 94.9% (95% CI 93.9-95.7%) on the annual arm and 94.3% (95% CI 93.3-95.2%) on the less frequent arm. Hazard ratio (HR) was 1.18 (95% CI 0.94 -1.47), demonstrating non-inferiority of less frequent mammograms at the 3% margin (NI p=0.003; critical value 1.61) and the 2.5% margin (NI p=0.02; critical value 1.51). A total of 14987 mammograms have been performed on the annual arm and 8047 on the less frequent arm. 1967 (75%) of 2618 women on the annual arm complied with their allocated schedule compared to 1775 (68%) of 2617 women on the less frequent arm. COVID-19 pandemic affected compliance; it is estimated that 345 (7%) women missed mammograms during the pandemic. A sensitivity analysis was performed on the 72% of women who fully complied with their scheduled mammograms as per protocol, and again NI was demonstrated for BCSS, RFI and OS. Conclusions: For patients aged 50 or older and 3 years post diagnosis, Mammo-50 demonstrated that less frequent mammograms were no worse than annual mammograms. These results provide evidence for less frequent mammographic surveillance for this patient population. Citation Format: Janet Dunn, Peter Donnelly, Nada Elbeltagi, Andrea Marshall, Alastair Thompson, Riccardo Audisio, Sarah Pinder, David Cameron, Amy Campbell, Sue Hartup, Lesley Turner, Annie Young, Helen Higgins, Eila Watson, Sophie Gasson, Peter Barrett-Lee, Claire Hulme, Bethany Shinkins, Peter Hall, Andy Evans. Mammographic surveillance in early breast cancer patients aged 50 years or over: results of the Mammo-50 non-inferiority trial of annual versus less frequent mammography [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 GS03-02.

Predicting five-year interval second breast cancer risk in women with prior breast cancer.

Annual surveillance mammography is recommended for women with a personal history of breast cancer. Risk prediction models that estimate mammography failures such as interval second breast cancers could help to tailor surveillance imaging regimens to women's individual risk profiles. In a cohort of women with a history of breast cancer receiving surveillance mammography in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium in 1996-2019, we used LASSO-penalized regression to estimate the probability of an interval second cancer (invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ) in the one-year following a negative surveillance mammogram. Based on predicted risks from this one-year risk model, we generated cumulative risks of an interval second cancer for the five-year period following each mammogram. Model performance was evaluated using cross-validation in the overall cohort and within race and ethnicity strata. In 173,290 surveillance mammograms, we observed 496 interval cancers. One-year risk models were well-calibrated (expected/observed ratio = 1.00) with good accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.64). Model performance was similar across race and ethnicity groups. The median five-year cumulative risk was 1.20% (interquartile range 0.93-1.63%). Median five-year risks were highest in women who were under age 40 or pre- or peri-menopausal at diagnosis and those with estrogen receptor-negative primary breast cancers. Our risk model identified women at high risk of interval second breast cancers who may benefit from additional surveillance imaging modalities. Risk models should be evaluated to determine if risk-guided supplemental surveillance imaging improves early detection and decreases surveillance failures.

Sources of Disparities in Surveillance Mammography Performance and Risk-Guided Recommendations for Supplemental Breast Imaging: A Simulation Study.

Surveillance mammography is recommended for all women with a history of breast cancer. Risk-guided surveillance incorporating advanced imaging modalities based on individual risk of a second cancer could improve cancer detection. However, personalized surveillance may also amplify disparities. In simulated populations using inputs from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC), we investigated race- and ethnicity-based disparities. Disparities were decomposed into those due to primary breast cancer and treatment characteristics, social determinants of health (SDOH) and differential error in second cancer ascertainment by modeling populations with or without variation across race and ethnicity in the distribution of these characteristics. We estimated effects of disparities on mammography performance and supplemental imaging recommendations stratified by race and ethnicity. In simulated cohorts based on 65,446 BCSC surveillance mammograms, when only cancer characteristics varied by race and ethnicity, mammograms for Black women had lower sensitivity compared with the overall population (64.1% vs. 71.1%). Differences between Black women and the overall population were larger when both cancer characteristics and SDOH varied by race and ethnicity (53.8% vs. 71.1%). Basing supplemental imaging recommendations on high predicted second cancer risk resulted in less frequent recommendations for Hispanic (6.7%) and Asian/Pacific Islander women (6.4%) compared with the overall population (10.0%). Variation in cancer characteristics and SDOH led to disparities in surveillance mammography performance and recommendations for supplemental imaging. Risk-guided surveillance imaging may exacerbate disparities. Decision-makers should consider implications for equity in cancer outcomes resulting from implementing risk-guided screening programs. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1479.

Surveillance Mammography Behaviors in Black and White Breast Cancer Survivors: Behavioral Risk Factors and Surveillance System, 2016

BackgroundSurveillance mammography is recommended annually for early detection of disease relapse among breast cancer survivors; yet Black women have poorer national rates of surveillance mammography compared to White women. Factors that influence racial disparities in surveillance mammography rates are poorly understood. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the contribution of health care access, socioeconomic status, and perceived health status on adherence to surveillance mammography among breast cancer survivors.MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey among Black and White women ≥ 18 years, who reported a breast cancer diagnosis and completed breast surgery and adjuvant treatment from the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System National Survey (BRFSS). Bivariate associations (chi-squared, t-test) for independent variables (e.g., health insurance, marital status) were analyzed with adherence to nationally recommended surveillance guidelines defined as two levels: adherent (received a mammogram in the last 12 months), vs. non- adherent (“received a mammogram in the last 2–5 years, 5 or more years or unsure). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between study variables with adherence, while adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsOf 963 breast cancer survivors, 91.7% were White women with an average age of 65. 71.7% reported a surveillance mammogram in the last 12 months, while 28.2% did not. Diagnosed > 5 years (p < 0.001); not having a routine checkup visit within 12 months (p = 0.045); and not seeing a doctor when needed due to cost (p = 0.026), were significantly related to survivor’s non-adherence to surveillance mammography guidelines. A significant interaction was found between race and residential area (p < 0.001). Compared to White women, Black women living in metropolitan/suburban residential areas were more likely to receive surveillance guidelines (OR:3.77;95% CI: 1.32–10.81); however Black women living in non-metropolitan areas were less likely to receive a surveillance mammogram compared to White women living in non-metropolitan areas (OR: 0.04; 95% CI: 0.00–0.50).ConclusionFindings from our study further explain the impact of socioeconomic disparities on racial differences in the use of surveillance mammography among breast cancer survivors. Black women living in non-metropolitan counties are an important subgroup for future research and screening and navigation interventions.

Performance of Statistical and Machine Learning Risk Prediction Models for Surveillance Benefits and Failures in Breast Cancer Survivors.

Machine learning (ML) approaches facilitate risk prediction model development using high-dimensional predictors and higher-order interactions at the cost of model interpretability and transparency. We compared the relative predictive performance of statistical and ML models to guide modeling strategy selection for surveillance mammography outcomes in women with a personal history of breast cancer (PHBC). We cross-validated seven risk prediction models for two surveillance outcomes, failure (breast cancer within 12 months of a negative surveillance mammogram) and benefit (surveillance-detected breast cancer). We included 9,447 mammograms (495 failures, 1,414 benefits, and 7,538 nonevents) from years 1996 to 2017 using a 1:4 matched case-control samples of women with PHBC in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. We assessed model performance of conventional regression, regularized regressions (LASSO and elastic-net), and ML methods (random forests and gradient boosting machines) by evaluating their calibration and, among well-calibrated models, comparing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). LASSO and elastic-net consistently provided well-calibrated predicted risks for surveillance failure and benefit. The AUCs of LASSO and elastic-net were both 0.63 (95% CI, 0.60-0.66) for surveillance failure and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.64-0.68) for surveillance benefit, the highest among well-calibrated models. For predicting breast cancer surveillance mammography outcomes, regularized regression outperformed other modeling approaches and balanced the trade-off between model flexibility and interpretability. Regularized regression may be preferred for developing risk prediction models in other contexts with rare outcomes, similar training sample sizes, and low-dimensional features.

Impact of Surveillance Mammography Intervals Less Than One Year on Performance Measures in Women With a Personal History of Breast Cancer.

When multiple surveillance mammograms are performed within an annual interval, the current guidance for one-year follow-up to determine breast cancer status results in shared follow-up periods in which a single breast cancer diagnosis can be attributed to multiple preceding examinations, posing a challenge for standardized performance assessment. We assessed the impact of using follow-up periods that eliminate the artifactual inflation of second breast cancer diagnoses. We evaluated surveillance mammograms from 2007-2016 in women with treated breast cancer linked with tumor registry and pathology outcomes. Second breast cancers included ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer diagnosed during one-year follow-up. The cancer detection rate, interval cancer rate, sensitivity, and specificity were compared using different follow-up periods: standard one-year follow-up per the American College of Radiology versus follow-up that was shortened at the next surveillance mammogram if less than one year (truncated follow-up). Performance measures were calculated overall and by indication (screening, evaluation for breast problem, and short interval follow-up). Of 117971 surveillance mammograms, 20% (n = 23533) were followed by another surveillance mammogram within one year. Standard follow-up identified 1597 mammograms that were associated with second breast cancers. With truncated follow-up, the breast cancer status of 179 mammograms (11.2%) was revised, resulting in 1418 mammograms associated with unique second breast cancers. The interval cancer rate decreased with truncated versus standard follow-up (3.6 versus 4.9 per 1000 mammograms, respectively), with a difference (95% confidence interval [CI]) of -1.3 (-1.6, -1.1). The overall sensitivity increased to 70.4% from 63.7%, for the truncated versus standard follow-up, with a difference (95% CI) of 6.6% (5.6%, 7.7%). The specificity remained stable at 98.1%. Truncated follow-up, if less than one year to the next surveillance mammogram, enabled second breast cancers to be associated with a single preceding mammogram and resulted in more accurate estimates of diagnostic performance for national benchmarks.

A Mixed Method Approach to Examine Surveillance Mammography Experiences in Black and White Breast Cancer Survivors

PurposeThe use of surveillance mammography following a breast cancer (BC) diagnosis is associated with early detection of disease relapse and increased overall survival; yet Black women compared to White women have the lowest surveillance mammography rates, with limited explanation. To further understand this racial disparity the present study examines the association of mammography beliefs, knowledge, and healthcare delivery factors on receipt of surveillance mammography among Black and White breast cancer survivors. MethodsThis is a convergent parallel mixed method study design of an online survey and online focus groups among Black and White BC survivors (N = 266) recruited from community engagement. The online focus groups consisted of a series of theory-informed questions via social media platforms (eg Breastcancer.org, Quora, Reddit). An in-depth thematic analysis approach was used to extract themes from online focus group data. Bivariate (χ2) and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted using the survey data to examine associated factors with receipt of a surveillance mammography within 12 months (yes vs. no). Results76% (n = 177) of women were Black, 62% were <5 years since diagnosis, 98% had health insurance, with an age range from 23 to 79 (mean = 55) years. 72% of the sample received a surveillance mammogram relative to 27%. Women more frequently received a surveillance mammogram if they reported perceived mammography benefits (<.001), underwent lumpectomy (P< .001) and had health insurance (P = .04). Black women without communication about surveillance care with providers had a lower likelihood of receiving a surveillance mammogram (OR:0.09,95% CI: 0.01-0.45, P = .003). Thematic findings from online focus groups included motivators for receipt of surveillance mammograms: physician recommendation, regular physical exams, and knowledge of recommended guidelines. Barriers of non-receipt of surveillance mammograms included: transportation, medical cost/financial barriers, feeling ignored from providers, and medical mistrust. ConclusionWomen may require more individualized information regarding their surveillance care to support routine guideline concordant follow-up. Patient-provider-communication is an integral part of Black survivors’ surveillance care needs. Improving patient-provider communication for Black women's is necessary to address this group cancer care needs.

When to stop? Mammographic surveillance in breast cancer survivors aged 70 years and older

To assess the rates of breast cancer detected in postoperative surveillance mammograms in women >70 Years and overall mortality in this age group. Four hundred and ninety-eight patients were identified retrospectively from a database from a single large UK hospital. Patients were included in the study if they were female, aged >70 years at diagnosis of either invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), had surgical treatment between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2014, and no previous diagnosis of breast cancer. Statistical analysis was performed using Excel, using the X2 test, with p≤0.05 considered statistically significant. The mean age of women included in this study was 77 years. The mean number of postoperative surveillance mammograms performed per patient was 4.2. In the 5-year follow-up, there was a local recurrence rate of 1.9% (n=6) and a contralateral breast cancer rate of 1% (n=6). The 5-year overall mortality rate was 17.7% (n=88), and the 5-year breast cancer-specific mortality rate was 7.2% (n=36). This study demonstrated low local recurrence and contralateral breast cancer rates during the 5-year follow-up period. Clear discussions therefore need to be held with older patients about the value of postoperative mammographic surveillance. Further research is required regarding patient opinion and experience to help develop more consistent guidelines.

The need for a robust system to stop breast cancer surveillance mammograms for patients who are diagnosed with metastatic disease

Introduction: Most breast cancer patients on a curative pathway for breast cancer are offered mammography on an annual basis for at least 5 years, or until 50. In many units, once ordered, there is an ongoing automatic process that continues for the appropriate timeframe, which is determined at the end of presumed curative treatment. For the majority of patients who are unfortunately diagnosed with metastatic disease, continuation with mammograms is not appropriate. They cause harm to patients and put pressure on radiology resources.

Adherence to Cancer Survivorship Care Guidelines and Health Care Utilization Patterns Among Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer Survivors in Singapore.

PURPOSECurrently, limited information is available on care provided to breast cancer survivors in Singapore. This study aims to assess the quality of post-treatment cancer survivorship care among breast cancer survivors on the basis of compliance with international guidelines up to 5 years post-primary treatment.METHODSThis study analyzed a cohort of 189 nonmetastatic breast cancer survivors recruited from the National Cancer Centre Singapore, Changi General Hospital, and KK Women's and Children's Hospital between November 2011 and September 2015. Data were retrieved from electronic medical records in 6-month intervals. Adherence to guidelines was assessed in four areas: (1) recurrent cancer surveillance, (2) monitoring and detecting late effects, (3) health care resource utilization, and (4) preventive care. Descriptive statistics, Kaplan-Meier, and regression analyses were conducted.RESULTSAnnual surveillance mammogram adherence rates were ≥ 83% consistently. The most common new diagnosis was osteoporosis at an incidence rate of 102 (95% CI, 77.6 to 135) cases per 1,000 person-years. Overall, ≤ 10.1% of survivors had an emergency department or hospitalization visit. Oncologist services were overutilized, with a median of 6 (interquartile range: 4-10) visits in the first 6 months before reducing to a median of 2 (interquartile range: 1-3) visits biannually 3 years post-treatment. Bone mineral density test utilization rate adhered to guidelines for 92.2% of aromatase inhibitor recipients but only for 36.4% of premenopausal tamoxifen recipients.CONCLUSIONOverall, adherence rates to surveillance and osteoporosis preventive care were high. Extensive utilization of oncologist services up to 5 years post-primary treatment could be reversed with strategies to engage and coordinate survivorship care with primary care providers, leveraging their strengths to improve adherence to health promotion and chronic disease management.

Mammographic Surveillance After Breast-Conserving Therapy: Impact of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Aided Detection.

BACKGROUND. Postoperative mammograms present interpretive challenges due to postoperative distortion and hematomas. The application of digital breast tomosyn-thesis (DBT) and artificial intelligence-based computer-aided detection (AI-CAD) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT) has not been widely investigated. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to assess the impact of additional DBT or AI-CAD on recall rate and diagnostic performance in women undergoing mammographic surveillance after BCT. METHODS. This retrospective study included 314 women (mean age, 53.3 ± 10.6 [SD] years; four with bilateral breast cancer) who underwent BCT followed by DBT (mean interval from surgery to DBT, 15.2 ± 15.4 months). Three breast radiologists independently reviewed images in three sessions: digital mammography (DM), DM with DBT (DM plus DBT), and DM with AI-CAD (DM plus AI-CAD). Recall rates and diagnostic performance were compared between DM, DM plus DBT, and DM plus AI-CAD using the readers' mean results. RESULTS. Of the 314 women, six breast recurrences (three ipsilateral and three contralateral) had developed at the time of surveillance mammography. The ipsilateral breast recall rate was lower for DM plus AI-CAD (1.9%) than for DM (11.2%) or DM plus DBT (4.1%) (p < .001). The contralateral breast recall rate was significantly lower for DM plus AI-CAD (1.5%, p < .001) than for DM (6.6%) but for not DM plus DBT (2.7%, p = .08). In the ipsilateral breast, accuracy was higher for DM plus AI-CAD (97.0%) than for DM (88.5%) or DM plus DBT (94.8%) (p < .05); specificity was higher for DM plus AI-CAD (98.3%) than for DM (89.3%) or DM plus DBT (96.1%) (p < .05); sensitivity was significantly lower for DM plus AI-CAD (22.2%) than for DM (66.7%, p = .03) but not DM plus DBT (22.2%, p > .99). In the contralateral breast, accuracy was significantly higher for DM plus AI-CAD (97.1%) than for DM (92.5%, p < .001) but not DM plus DBT (96.1%, p = .25); specificity was significantly higher for DM plus AI-CAD (98.6%) than for DM (93.7%, p < .001) but not DM plus DBT (97.5%) (p = .09); sensitivity was not different between DM (33.3%), DM plus DBT (22.2%), and DM plus AI-CAD (11.1%) (p > .05). CONCLUSION. After BCT, adjunct DBT or AI-CAD reduced recall rates and improved accuracy in the ipsilateral and contralateral breasts compared with DM. In the ipsilateral breast, the addition of AI-CAD resulted in a lower recall rate and higher accuracy than the addition of DBT. CLINICAL IMPACT. AI-CAD may help address the challenges of interpreting post-BCT surveillance mammograms.

Racial/ethnic disparities in use of surveillance mammogram among breast cancer survivors: a systematic review.

Increasing number of breast cancer survivors in the USA have led to greater focus on the long-term health outcomes and surveillance care among these women. However limited evidence exists of use of surveillance mammography among breast cancer survivors and how it varies across racial/ethnic groups. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to explore disparities in use of surveillance mammogram among women breast cancer survivors by searching for relevant studies published between 2000 and 2020 from Medline (Ovid), PubMed (National Library of Medicine), and PsycINFO (Ovid) bibliographic databases. Two authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of all articles that reported surveillance mammography use across racial/ethnic groups. Data on study design, screening eligibility, sample size, operational definition, and/or measure of the use of a surveillance mammogram among breast cancer survivors and the association between race/ethnicity and use of a surveillance mammogram were summarized in the evidence tables. We identified 1544 records from the three databases, and 30 studies examined the use of surveillance mammograms among breast cancer survivors across race/ethnic groups. Of these, 21 provided adjusted estimates of racial/ethnic disparities in use of surveillance mammograms, and 15 of these reported statistically significant disparities. In summary, most studies reported that non-white women (mainly Blacks and Hispanics) were less likely to receive a timely surveillance mammogram compared to White. This study extends the evidence of racial/ethnic disparities beyond completion of initial treatment by finding similar disparities in receipt of surveillance mammograms among breast cancer survivors. Our findings identify a need to improve efforts to increase post-treatment use of surveillance mammography among racial/ethnic minority women to reduce these gaps and improve overall clinical and quality of life outcomes.

109 Game Changing Magnetic Experience in Rural and Urban Wirral Peninsula - Our Experience with Magseed Localisation of Impalpable Breast Tumours and Axillary Nodes

Abstract Introduction Magseed is a novel localization technology in which a tiny seed is inserted to accurately mark the site of breast tumour. These can be detected intra-operatively by sentimag localization system. It aids localization of impalpable breast lesions improving margin clearance rates. Method A prospective study of first fifty Magseed localised breast tumour and axillary node excisions in Clatterbridge General Hospital. Results A total of 50 patients had 52 Magseed inserted. n = 14 was symptomatic, n = 35 was screen detected and n = 1 was an incidental finding on surveillance mammogram for a B3 lesion. 30 seeds were inserted on the right and 22 were inserted on the left (two were bilateral). 44 seeds were inserted under ultrasound guidance and the rest were targeted under stereo guidance (n = 8). Deployment of two resulted in malposition requiring wire localization. Mean age of subjects was 59.76 (range 31-81) years. Mean time to surgery after magseed insertion was 8.04 (range 1-27) days. Mean weight of the specimen was 48.57(range 10-264) gm. Mean size of the lesions was 20.32 (range 8-65) mm. Redo surgery for margin clearance was performed bringing the re-excision rate to 15.38% (n = 8). Conclusions We conclude that Magseed localization of breast tumours is a safe and reliable technique

Abstract PS2-43: Innovating a magnetic experience on wirral peninsula in the United Kingdom- our experience with magseed localisation of impalpable breast tumours and axillary node for therapeutic surgery and staging

Abstract INTRODUCTION Magseed is a novel localization technology in which a tiny seed is inserted to accurately mark the site of breast tumour. These can be detected intra-operatively by sentimag localization system. These can be implanted days prior to surgery and do not require use of radioactive material. It aids localization of impalpable breast lesions improving margin clearance rates. METHODS A study was undertaken of 50 patients undergoing Magseed localization of non-palpable breast lesions in rural and urban areas of Wirral Peninsula in the UK. Data including age, mode of localization (Stereo-guided/ Ultrasound guided), presentation (Symptomatic/Screen detected), and time to surgery after localization, size and weight of specimen, histology and re-excision rates was collected between June 2019 and November 2019. RESULTS A total of 50 patients had 52 Magseed inserted. n=14 were symptomatic, n=35 were screen detected and n=1 was an incidental finding on surveillance mammogram for a B3 lesion. All 50 patients had therapeutic surgery. 30 seeds were inserted on the right and 22 were inserted on the left (two were bilateral). 44 seeds were inserted under Ultrasound guidance and the rest were targeted under stereo guidance (n=8).Deployment of 2 Magseed resulted in malposition requiring wire localization. Mean age of subjects was 59.76 (range 31-81) years. Mean time to surgery after Magseed insertion was 8.04 (range 1-27) days. Mean weight of the specimen was 48.57(range 10-264) gm. Mean size of the lesions was 20.32 (range 8-65) mm. Redo surgery for margin clearance was performed bringing the re-excision rate to 15.38% (n=8). CONCLUSION We conclude that Magseed localization of breast tumours is a safe and reliable technique in terms of accuracy, localization and clearance of margins without any radiation concerns. Our re-excision rate for margin clearance is comparable to the national average. The only caveat we observed was localization of impalpable lesions prior to surgery in bulky breasts where we had to utilize wire guided localization on the day of surgery. Large scale data are lacking to compare Magseed localization with other localization techniques for non-palpable breast lesions. Citation Format: Tahera Arif, Mohammed Shameem Absar, Jonathan Michael Lund. Innovating a magnetic experience on wirral peninsula in the United Kingdom- our experience with magseed localisation of impalpable breast tumours and axillary node for therapeutic surgery and staging [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS2-43.

P097: Surveillance mammogram in patients over 70 after mastectomy: Does it make a difference?

Introduction: As the number of breast cancer survivors increase, interest in patient management and surveillance after mastectomy has also increased. There is variation in surveillance between units in terms of duration and frequency of follow-up, clinical and radiographical follow-up or mammography alone and upper age limits. Our current practice is annual mammogram for 5 years for all. With increasing numbers of patients requiring surveillance and finite resources we looked at whether there is a group of patients in whom surveillance mammography may not be necessary.

Facility Variability in Examination Indication Among Women With Prior Breast Cancer: Implications and the Need for Standardization.

We sought to identify and characterize examinations in women with a personal history of breast cancer likely performed for asymptomatic surveillance. We included surveillance mammograms (1997-2017) in asymptomatic women with a personal history of breast cancer diagnosed at age ≥18 years (1996-2016) from 103 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium facilities. We examined facility-level variability in examination indication. We modeled the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) at the examination level of a (1) nonscreening indication and (2) surveillance interval ≤9 months using Poisson regression with fixed effects for facility, stage, diagnosis age, surgery, examination year, and time since diagnosis. Among 244,855 surveillance mammograms, 69.5% were coded with a screening indication, 12.7% short-interval follow-up, and 15.3% as evaluation of a breast problem. Within a facility, the proportion of examinations with a screening indication ranged from 6% to 100% (median 86%, interquartile range 79%-92%). Facilities varied the most for examinations in the first 5 years after diagnosis, with 39.4% of surveillance mammograms having a nonscreening indication. Within a facility, breast conserving surgery compared with mastectomy (RR= 1.64; 95% CI= 1.60-1.68) and less time since diagnosis (1 year versus 5 years; RR= 1.69; 95% CI= 1.66-1.72; 3 years versus 5 years= 1.20; 95% CI= 1.18-1.23) were strongly associated with a nonscreening indication with similar results for ≤9-month surveillance interval. Screening indication and >9-month surveillance intervals were more common in more recent years. Variability in surveillance indications across facilities in the United States supports including indications beyond screening in studies evaluating surveillance mammography effectiveness and demonstrates the need for standardization.

Time Interval for Development of Breast Cancer after Normal MRI of the Breast: Reducing Surveillance Mammograms

Burns, Jessica MD; Brown, Meghan MD; Lewis, Terrence MD; Elsamaloty, Haitham MD; Chaudhuri, Prabir MD, FACS Author Information