Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Unveiling the histopathologic spectrum of MRI-guided breast biopsies: an institutional pathological-radiological correlation

  • Preclinical study
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has high sensitivity but suffers from low specificity, resulting in many benign breast biopsies for MRI-detected lesions. We sought to compare histologic findings between patients who underwent MRI-guided breast biopsy versus biopsy via other imaging modalities as well as to examine features associated with malignancy in the MRI cohort to help inform MRI-biopsy practice.

Methods

A 2-year (2018–2019) retrospective review of breast biopsies at our enterprise was conducted. Biopsies were categorized as stereotactic, ultrasound, MRI, or palpation guided. Pathology was categorized as benign (further divided into nine categories), atypical, or malignant (subdivided into in situ and invasive carcinoma). Pathology was compared between biopsy groups. Clinical, pathologic, and imaging features were compared between pathology groups within the MRI cohort.

Results

5828 biopsies from 4154 patients were reviewed, including 548 MRI-guided biopsies with stratification of MRI-biopsy pathology as follows: 69% benign, 13.8% atypical, and 17.2% malignant. Among benign MRI biopsies, there was higher frequency of “clustered cysts with papillary apocrine metaplasia” (56/548; 10.2%) and lower rate of fibroadenoma/fibroadenomatous change (55/548; 10%) compared to other modalities (158 or 3% and 1144 or 21.7% of 5280 biopsies, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed indication of breast cancer (p < .0001), ipsilateral cancer (p < .0001) and rapid initial phase kinetics (p = .017) to remain significantly associated with malignant MRI-biopsy pathology.

Conclusions

A concurrent or recent breast cancer diagnosis was most predictive of malignancy on MRI-guided breast biopsy. Combined MRI feature evaluation and radiologic-pathologic concordance activities may allow for prognostic refinement and improved risk stratification.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The dataset generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Manion E, Brock JE, Raza S, Reisenbichler ES (2014) MRI-guided breast needle core biopsies: pathologic features of newly diagnosed malignancies. Breast J 20(5):453–460. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rauch GM, Dogan BE, Smith TB, Liu P, Yang WT (2012) Outcome analysis of 9-gauge MRI-guided vacuum-assisted core needle breast biopsies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198(2):292–299. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.7594

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Moy L, Niell B, Monsees B, Sickles EA (2018) Breast cancer screening in women at higher-than-average risk: recommendations from the ACR. J Am Coll Radiol 15(3):408–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Landercasper J, Linebarger JH (2011) Contemporary breast imaging and concordance assessment: a surgical perspective. Surg Clin North Am 91(1):33–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2010.10.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Teller P, Jefford VJ, Gabram SG, Newell M, Carlson GW (2010) The utility of breast MRI in the management of breast cancer. Breast J 16(4):394–403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00938.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Hacker A, Sedlacek S (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging: the evolution of breast imaging. Breast 22(2):S77–S82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2013.07.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Peters NH, Borel Rinkes IH, Zuithoff NP, Mali WP, Moons KG, Peeters PH (2008) Meta-analysis of MR imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 246(1):116–124. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2461061298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Prakash S, Venkataraman S, Slanetz PJ et al (2016) Improving patient care by incorporation of multidisciplinary breast radiology-pathology correlation conference. Can Assoc Radiol J 67(2):122–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carj.2015.07.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Abe H, Schmidt RA, Shah RN et al (2010) MR-directed (“Second-Look”) ultrasound examination for breast lesions detected initially on MRI: MR and sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194(2):370–377. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2707

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Spick C, Baltzer PA (2014) Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 273(2):401–409. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14140474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Negrão EMS, Souza JA, Marques EF, Bitencourt AGV (2019) Breast cancer phenotype influences MRI response evaluation after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jabbar SB, Lynch B, Seiler S, Hwang H, Sahoo S (2017) Pathologic findings of breast lesions detected on magnetic resonance imaging. Arch Pathol Lab Med 141(11):1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2016-0552-OA

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Macura KJ, Ouwerkerk R, Jacobs MA, Bluemke DA (2006) Patterns of enhancement on breast MR images: interpretation and imaging pitfalls. Radiographics 26(6):1719. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.266065025

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Dratwa C, Jalaguier-Coudray A, Thomassin-Piana J et al (2016) Breast MR biopsy: pathological and radiological correlation. Eur Radiol 26(8):2510–2519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-4071-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yalnız C, Rosenblat J, Spak D et al (2019) Association of retrospective peer review and positive predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging-guided vacuum-assisted needle biopsies of breast. Eur J Breast Health 15(4):229–234. https://doi.org/10.5152/ejbh.2019.5002

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Liberman L, Drotman M, Morris EA et al (2000) Imaging-histologic discordance at percutaneous breast biopsy. Cancer 89(12):2538–2546. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20001215)89:12%3c2538::aid-cncr4%3e3.0.co;2-#

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233(3):830–849. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2333031484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Kuhl CK et al (2007) MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356(13):1295–1303. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa065447

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Papalouka V, Kilburn-Toppin F, Gaskarth M et al (2018) MRI-guided breast biopsy: a review of technique, indications and radiological-pathological correlations. Clin Radiol 73(908):e17-908.e25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2018.05.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Siziopikou KP, Jokich P, Cobleigh M (2011) Pathologic findings in MRI-guided needle core biopsies of the breast in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Int J Breast Cancer 2011:1–3. https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/613285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Recavarran RA, Chivukula M, Carter G et al (2009) Columnar cell lesions and pseudoangiomatous hyperplasia like stroma: is there an epithelial-stromal interaction? Int J Clin Exp Pathol 3(1):87–97

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA et al (2006) Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 238(1):42–53. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2381042117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG (2001) Update of breast MR imaging architectural interpretation model. Radiology 219(2):484–494. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.219.2.r01ma44484

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Morris EA, Cornstock CE, Lee CH (2013) ACR BI-RADS magnetic resonance imaging. ACR BIR-ADS atlas breast imaging reporting and data system, 5th edn. American College of Radiology, VA

    Google Scholar 

  25. Maltez de Almeida JR, Gomes AB, Barros TP et al (2015) Subcategorization of suspicious breast lesions (BI-RADS category 4) according to MRI criteria: role of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. Am J Radiol 205:222–231. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13834

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable (there were no external funding sources for this study).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, Medical College of Wisconsin, 9200 W. Wisconsin Ave., Lab Building, Lower Level, Room L69, Milwaukee, WI, 53226, USA

    Gustavo Moreno, Mariel Molina & Julie M. Jorns

  2. Department of Biostatistics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    Ruizhe Wu

  3. Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    Julie R. Sullivan

Authors
  1. Gustavo Moreno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mariel Molina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ruizhe Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Julie R. Sullivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Julie M. Jorns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: GM, JJ; Methodology: GM, JJ, RW, JS; Formal analysis and investigation: GM, MM, RW, JJ, JS; Writing—original draft preparation: GM, MM; Writing—review and editing: RW, JJ, JS.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie M. Jorns.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

This research study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the Medical College of Wisconsin. The study was conducted retrospectively from data obtained for clinical purposes, and IRB waiver was granted (IRB# PRO00023032).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moreno, G., Molina, M., Wu, R. et al. Unveiling the histopathologic spectrum of MRI-guided breast biopsies: an institutional pathological-radiological correlation. Breast Cancer Res Treat 187, 673–680 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06251-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06251-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation