Screening for High-Familial-Risk Women

  • Athina VourtsisEmail author


Women with a high familial breast cancer risk have an increased likelihood of developing breast cancer and a subsequent increased risk of developing contralateral malignancy. Therefore, additional surveillance has been recommended to reduce risks. Mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are the three modalities that have been evaluated as screening tools for these women. Breast MRI is the most sensitive screening modality in this setting, especially in younger women, but mammography is also beneficial. Optimal screening may be achieved with a multimodal approach with age-specific protocols that balance sensitivity and cost efficacy.


Familial breast cancer Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Women at high risk BRCA1 carriers BRCA2 carriers Breast ultrasound Mammography Automated breast ultrasound Tomosynthesis 


  1. 1.
    Antoniou AC, Pharoah PP, Smith P, Easton DF. The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer. 2004;91(8):1580–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Collins IM, Bickerstaffe A, Ranaweera T, Maddumarachchi S, Keogh L, Emery J, et al. iPrevent((R)): a tailored, web-based, decision support tool for breast cancer risk assessment and management. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;156(1):171–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cuzick J. Assessing risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10(Suppl 4):S13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, Harms S, Leach MO, Lehman CD, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(2):75–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Familial breast cancer: Classification and care of people at risk of familial breast cancer and management of breast cancer and related risks in people with a family history of breast cancer. Update of clinical guideline 14 and 41. (Clinical guideline 164.). 2013 [April 15, 2016]; Available from:
  6. 6.
    Lakhani SR. The pathology of familial breast cancer: morphological aspects. Breast Cancer Res. 1999;1(1):31–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pichert G, Bolliger B, Buser K, Pagani O. Swiss Institute for Applied Cancer Research Network for cancer predisposition T, Counseling. Evidence-based management options for women at increased breast/ovarian cancer risk. Ann Oncol. 2003;14(1):9–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brekelmans CT, Seynaeve C, Bartels CC, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Meijers-Heijboer EJ, Crepin CM, et al. Effectiveness of breast cancer surveillance in BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers and women with high familial risk. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(4):924–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, Easton DF, Eeles RA, Evans DG, et al. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet. 2005;365(9473):1769–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sung JS, Stamler S, Brooks J, Kaplan J, Huang T, Dershaw DD, et al. Breast cancers detected at screening MR imaging and mammography in patients at high risk: method of detection reflects tumor Histopathologic results. Radiology. 2016;20:151419.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, Morakkabati-Spitz N, Wardelmann E, Fimmers R, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(33):8469–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Passaperuma K, Warner E, Causer PA, Hill KA, Messner S, Wong JW, et al. Long-term results of screening with magnetic resonance imaging in women with BRCA mutations. Br J Cancer. 2012;107(1):24–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn IM, Hop WC, Causer PA, Leach MO, Warner E, et al. BRCA1 mutation and young age predict fast breast cancer growth in the Dutch, United Kingdom, and Canadian magnetic resonance imaging screening trials. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(24):7357–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chereau E, Uzan C, Balleyguier C, Chevalier J, de Paillerets BB, Caron O, et al. Characteristics, treatment, and outcome of breast cancers diagnosed in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers in intensive screening programs including magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Breast Cancer. 2010;10(2):113–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, Besnard PE, Zonderland HM, Obdeijn IM, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(5):427–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F, Manoukian S, Bergonzi S, Trecate G, et al. Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk italian 1 study): final results. Investig Radiol. 2011;46(2):94–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, Causer PA, Zubovits JT, Jong RA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA. 2004;292(11):1317–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P, Thickman D, Hylton N, Warner E, et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer. 2005;103(9):1898–905.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weinstein SP, Localio AR, Conant EF, Rosen M, Thomas KM, Schnall MD. Multimodality screening of high-risk women: a prospective cohort study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(36):6124–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kuhl C, Weigel S, Schrading S, Arand B, Bieling H, Konig R, et al. Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(9):1450–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Riedl CC, Luft N, Bernhart C, Weber M, Bernathova M, Tea MK, et al. Triple-modality screening trial for familial breast cancer underlines the importance of magnetic resonance imaging and questions the role of mammography and ultrasound regardless of patient mutation status, age, and breast density. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(10):1128–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Warner E, Messersmith H, Causer P, Eisen A, Shumak R, Plewes D. Systematic review: using magnetic resonance imaging to screen women at high risk for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(9):671–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schrading S, Kuhl CK. Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology. 2008;246(1):58–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G, Verdecchia A, Santaquilani M, Musumeci R, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology. 2007;242(3):698–715.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chiarelli AM, Prummel MV, Muradali D, Majpruz V, Horgan M, Carroll JC, et al. Effectiveness of screening with annual magnetic resonance imaging and mammography: results of the initial screen from the ontario high risk breast screening program. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(21):2224–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rhiem K, Schmutzler RK. Genetic risk factors exemplified by familial breast cancer. Forum. 2015;30(2):139–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B, Decker T, Federico M, Gilbert FJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46(8):1296–316.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Foulkes WD, Chappuis PO, Wong N, Brunet JS, Vesprini D, Rozen F, et al. Primary node negative breast cancer in BRCA1 mutation carriers has a poor outcome. Ann Oncol. 2000;11(3):307–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Kriege M, Boetes C, Hop WC, Obdeijn IM, Oosterwijk JC, et al. Hereditary breast cancer growth rates and its impact on screening policy. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41(11):1610–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moller P, Stormorken A, Jonsrud C, Holmen MM, Hagen AI, Clark N, et al. Survival of patients with BRCA1-associated breast cancer diagnosed in an MRI-based surveillance program. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;139(1):155–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kurian AW, Sigal BM, Plevritis SK. Survival analysis of cancer risk reduction strategies for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(2):222–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moller P, Evans DG, Reis MM, Gregory H, Anderson E, Maehle L, et al. Surveillance for familial breast cancer: differences in outcome according to BRCA mutation status. Int J Cancer. 2007;121(5):1017–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heemskerk-Gerritsen BA, Brekelmans CT, Menke-Pluymers MB, van Geel AN, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Bartels CC, et al. Prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women at risk of hereditary breast cancer: long-term experiences at the Rotterdam family cancer clinic. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(12):3335–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Huzarski T, Byrski T, Gronwald J, Gorski B, Domagala P, Cybulski C, et al. Ten-year survival in patients with BRCA1-negative and BRCA1-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(26):3191–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Giess CS, Raza S, Birdwell RL. Patterns of nonmasslike enhancement at screening breast MR imaging of high-risk premenopausal women. Radiographics. 2013;33(5):1343–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM, Jong RA, Barr RG, Lehrer DE, et al. Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology. 2010;254(1):79–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, Schild HH, Hilgers RD, Bieling HB. Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(22):2304–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002;359(9310):909–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004;233(3):830–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US--diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology. 1998;207(1):191–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Komenaka IK, Ditkoff BA, Joseph KA, Russo D, Gorroochurn P, Ward M, et al. The development of interval breast malignancies in patients with BRCA mutations. Cancer. 2004;100(10):2079–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Speit G, Trenz K. Chromosomal mutagen sensitivity associated with mutations in BRCA genes. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2004;104(1–4):325–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Giess CS, Frost EP, Birdwell RL. Difficulties and errors in diagnosis of breast neoplasms. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2012;33(4):288–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, Baum JK, Acharyya S, Cormack JB, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology. 2008;246(2):376–83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology. 2004;230(1):29–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1773–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bae MS, Moon WK, Chang JM, Koo HR, Kim WH, Cho N, et al. Breast cancer detected with screening US: reasons for nondetection at mammography. Radiology. 2014;270(2):369–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Berg WA, Mendelson EB. Technologist-performed handheld screening breast US imaging: how is it performed and what are the outcomes to date? Radiology. 2014;272(1):12–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB, Lehrer D, Bohm-Velez M, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299(18):2151–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zintsmaster S, Morrison J, Sharman S, Shah BA. Differences in pain perceptions between automated breast ultrasound and digital screening mammography. J Diagn Med Sonogr. 2013;29(2):62–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    LaTrenta LR, Menell JH, Morris EA, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD, Liberman L. Breast lesions detected with MR imaging: utility and histopathologic importance of identification with US. Radiology. 2003;227(3):856–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Vashi R, Hooley R, Butler R, Geisel J, Philpotts L. Breast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: imaging modalities and pregnancy-associated breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200(2):321–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wang PI, Chong ST, Kielar AZ, Kelly AM, Knoepp UD, Mazza MB, et al. Imaging of pregnant and lactating patients: part 1, evidence-based review and recommendations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(4):778–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Sechopoulos I, Suryanarayanan S, Vedantham S, D’Orsi CJ, Karellas A. Radiation dose to organs and tissues from mammography: Monte Carlo and phantom study. Radiology. 2008;246(2):434–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    American College of Radiology website. ACR manual on contrast media. 2010; Available from:
  56. 56.
    Mainiero MB, Lourenco A, Mahoney MC, Newell MS, Bailey L, Barke LD, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria breast cancer screening. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013;10(1):11–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Diagnostic Mammography CenterAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations