Skip to main content
Log in

Why don’t all women with extremely dense breasts want MRI screening?

  • Commentary
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The Original Article was published on 19 April 2024

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Veenhuizen SGA, de Lange SV, Bakker MF et al (2021) Supplemental breast MRI for women with extremely dense breasts: results of the second screening round of the DENSE trial. Radiology 299:278–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bakker MF, de Lange SV, Pijnappel RM et al (2019) Supplemental MRI screening for women with extremely dense breast tissue. N Engl J Med 381:2091–2102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM et al (2010) Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology 254:79–87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Veenhuizen SGA, van Grinsven SEL, Laseur IL et al (2024) Re-attendance in supplemental breast MRI screening rounds of the DENSE trial among women with extremely dense breasts. Eur Radiol 381:2091–2102

  5. Son D, Phillips J, Mehta TS, Mehta R, Brook A, Dialani VM (2022) Patient preferences regarding use of contrast-enhanced imaging for breast cancer screening. Acad Radiol 29:S229–S238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. DenseBreast-info.org (2024) https://densebreast-info.org/for-patients/. Accessed March 30, 2024

  7. Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Moy L, Lee CS, Destounis SV (2023) Breast cancer screening for women at higher-than-average risk: updated recommendations from the ACR. J Am Coll Radiol 20:902–914

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kuhl CK, Gatsonis C, Newstead G et al (2023) Incidence round screening performance among women with dense breasts undergoing abbreviated breast MRI and digital breast tomosynthesis (ECOG-ACRIN EA1141). J Clin Oncol 41

  9. Berg WA, Bandos AI, Sava MG (2023) Analytic hierarchy process analysis of patient preferences for contrast-enhanced mammography versus MRI as supplemental screening options for breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 20:758–768

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Berg WA (2021) BI-RADS 3 on screening breast ultrasound: what is it and what is the appropriate management? J Breast Imaging 3:527–538

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The author receives grant funding from the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, BCRF 2023-015, and the Pennsylvania Breast Cancer Coalition.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wendie A. Berg.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Wendie A. Berg.

Conflict of interest

WAB discloses consulting with Exai Bio, Inc., and research grant support to her institution from Koios Medical, Inc. She is a voluntary Chief Scientific Advisor to DenseBreast-info.org and a voluntary Associate Editor to the Journal of Breast Imaging.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was not required.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was not required.

Study subjects or cohorts overlap

Not applicable.

Methodology

  • Commentary

Additional information

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This comment refers to the article available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10685-9.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Berg, W.A. Why don’t all women with extremely dense breasts want MRI screening?. Eur Radiol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10773-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10773-w

Navigation