Abstract
Purpose
Radial scars (RS) commonly present mammographically as architectural distortions, but these lesions may be associated with non-invasive and invasive breast cancer. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has resulted in higher detection rates of architectural distortion particularly in patients with dense breast tissue. We hypothesized that rates of clinically relevant lesions confirmed surgically would be lower in patients who received DBT imaging compared with those who received standard digital breast imaging.
Methods
We performed a retrospective review of 223 patients diagnosed with pure RS by core biopsy and surgical excision before and after DBT was introduced. The rate of upgrading to malignancy or high-risk lesion was evaluated. Demographics, biopsy type, and histologic data were analyzed. Univariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify variables that may be associated with upgrading.
Results
The rate of identifying RS increased from 0.04–.13% (P < 0.0001) with DBT imaging. The upgrade rate on surgical specimen to invasive or non-invasive cancer was similar before and after DBT; 6% versus 3%, as were findings of a high-risk lesion; 12% versus 22%. No predictive factors were identified for patients upgraded to malignant neoplasms or high-risk lesions.
Conclusions
The likelihood of identifying RS has increased with DBT imaging, but rates of upgrading to a malignant neoplasm or high-risk lesion were similar to those before DBT. Although the rate of upgrading to malignancy after DBT was low, an excisional biopsy should be considered as 22% of patients were upgraded to high-risk lesions. These patients are candidates for chemoprevention and/or high-risk surveillance.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Radial scars (RS) are benign proliferative breast lesions. Histologically, they are defined as sclerosing lesions with a central, sclerotic nidus (often associated with fibroelastotic change), from which ducts and lobules radiate circumferentially [1]. On mammographic imaging, radial scars have a spiculated outline with translucent center and can appear as architectural distortion, which can be associated with microcalcifications [2,3,4]. These lesions are often difficult to distinguish from a malignant neoplasm on mammography, therefore they are commonly recommended for a core biopsy.
Radial scars diagnosed by core biopsy may be associated with findings of invasive cancer and/or an atypical hyperplastic lesion and lobular neoplasm at subsequent surgical excision. Reported rates of radial scar upgraded to a malignancy on final pathology range from 0 to 40% [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. Conlon et al [10] performed a meta-analysis of 20 studies with RS excision and found an upgrade rate of 7.5% for RS without atypia. Although more recent studies have shown low rates of upgrading to malignancy, the rate of identifying a high-risk lesion (atypical hyperplasia or lobular neoplasia) at surgical excision ranges from 20 to 26% [13, 16, 17].
Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) allows for three-dimensional reconstruction of the breast that offers advantages over two-dimensional mammographic imaging. This technology allows opportunities to better distinguish and characterize masses, asymmetries, and architectural distortion [18, 19]. Patient recall rates for architectural distortion and rates of identifying a malignant neoplasm have increased with the use of DBT imaging [20,21,22,23,24]. If DBT imaging detects higher rates of architectural distortion, which can represent a radial scar, malignant neoplasm, or non-malignant lesion, we questioned whether these higher detection rates were associated with a decrease in rates of finding clinically relevant lesions at surgical excision. The technological advantages of DBT infer that patients may benefit from having to undergo fewer unnecessary surgical excisions; that is, fewer surgical excisions with a pathologic result of pure RS.
The aim of this study was to review our experience with patients diagnosed with pure RS by core biopsy and the rates of upgrading to a malignant neoplasm or high-risk lesion with standard digital mammographic imaging compared to DBT imaging. We hypothesized that the rate of radial scars by core biopsy would be higher with DBT imaging compared with standard digital mammographic imaging, but rates of clinically relevant lesions confirmed surgically would be lower.
Methods
Following approval by the local Institutional Review Board, a single institution review was performed to identify patients diagnosed with RS by core needle biopsy with or without atypia who underwent subsequent surgical excision at Carolinas Medical Center from January, 2007 through December, 2017. Patients were included if they were diagnosed with pure RS by core biopsy. In this study, pure radial scar was defined as radial scar diagnosed by core biopsy with or without proliferative breast changes. Exclusion criteria included patients who were followed at an outside facility, personal history of breast cancer, and additional findings by core biopsy such as malignancy, atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular carcinoma in situ, papilloma with or without atypia, or flat epithelial atypia.
The upgrade rates to malignancy and high-risk lesions were evaluated. An upgrade to malignant neoplasm included the presence of non-invasive or invasive carcinoma at surgical excision. An upgrade to high-risk lesions included the presence of atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ at surgical excision. Variables of interest included age, family history of breast cancer, race, biopsy type, and histological findings.
Digital breast tomosynthesis was introduced at our institution on August, 20, 2013. All study patients from January 1, 2007 through August 19, 2013 received standard digital mammography. All study patients from August 20, 2013 through December 31, 2017 received DBT.
Statistical analysis
Patient characteristics were summarized by using the frequency and percent for categorical variables, and descriptive statistics, including mean and standard deviation. The Chi square test (χ2), Fisher’s exact test, and Student’s t test for categorical variables were performed to identify characteristics associated with upgrading to cancer and high-risk lesions. Univariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate individual associations between factors related to RS diagnosed by core biopsy and cancer or high-risk lesions identified at surgical excision. Statistical analyses were performed by using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA).
Results
Of the 431 patients diagnosed with radial scar by core biopsy, 223 met inclusion criteria. Of these 223 patients, 65 patients were diagnosed by standard digital mammographic imaging, and 158 patients were diagnosed with DBT imaging (Fig. 1). A total of 208 patients did not meet inclusion criteria. Seventy-eight of these patients were excluded because of a concurrent diagnosis as follows: atypical ductal hyperplasia (31), atypical lobular hyperplasia (18), lobular carcinoma in situ (4), flat epithelial atypia (3), papilloma with atypia (1), and papilloma without atypia (21). The remaining 130 patients were excluded due to the following: 6 with a personal history of breast cancer, 14 who elected observation, and 110 who were followed at an outside facility.
Of the patients included in the study, the mean age was 53 years (range, 26 years–81 years). The majority were diagnosed by stereotactic core vacuum-assisted biopsy with 9-gauge needles (57%) followed by ultrasound guided core biopsy with 14-gauge or 18-gauge needles (43%). Patient demographics, type of biopsy, and excisional biopsy results are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. There were 179,085 diagnostic mammograms performed with standard digital mammographic imaging and 122,048 diagnostic mammograms performed with DBT imaging. After the introduction of DBT imaging, there was a 0.09% increase in the rate of RS diagnosed by core biopsy; 0.04% (65 of 179,085 patients) were diagnosed with radial scars before DBT compared with 0.13% (158 of 122,048 patients) after DBT (P < 0.0001).
Of the patients diagnosed with RS by core biopsy who underwent surgical excision, 6% (4 of 65) were upgraded to malignancy with standard digital mammographic imaging and 3% (4 of 158) were upgraded to malignancy with DBT imaging. In contrast, 12% (8 of 65) were upgraded to high-risk lesions with standard digital mammographic imaging and 22% (34 of 158) were upgraded with DBT imaging. Although there was a decrease in the rate of upgrading to cancer and an increase in the rate of upgrading to high-risk lesions with DBT imaging, these findings were not statistically significant (P = 0.24, P = 0.10, respectively) (Tables 1, 3). There was a statistically significant difference in the type of biopsy used (ultrasound or stereotactic) before DBT compared with after DBT (P = 0.001) (Table 1). No predictive factors were identified for patients who were upgraded to malignant neoplasms or high-risk lesions on univariable logistic regression analyses (Tables 4, 5).
Some patients who had high-risk lesions on subsequent surgical excision were placed on chemoprevention and/or underwent additional high-risk screening. Of the 41 patients who qualified for chemoprevention, 16 (39%) began treatment and 25 (61%) declined treatment. Of the 31 patients who met National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for high-risk screening including annual mammograms and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based on the Gail risk assessment model or Tyrer-Cuzick model, 12 (39%) underwent high-risk screening, 5 (16%) declined, and 14 (45%) did not have MRI largely due to fat replaced breast.
Discussion
This study illustrates that despite a significant increase in the rate of radial scars by core biopsy identified with DBT imaging compared to standard digital mammographic imaging, the rates of upgrade to a malignant neoplasm on surgical excision were similar. In this series, the rate of upgrading to malignancy at surgical excision with DBT imaging was 3% (4 of 158 patients), whereas the rate of upgrading to a high-risk lesion was 22% (34 of 158 patients).
This study was one of the larger series to evaluate the upgrade rates of malignant neoplasms and high-risk lesions in patients with pure RS identified by core needle biopsy particularly after the introduction of DBT. Although previous studies reported variable rates of upgrading to malignant neoplasms ranging from 0 to 40% [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15], more recent studies report lower rates of upgrading to malignancy ranging from 1 to 8% [10, 12,13,14, 16, 17, 25]. This may be attributed to the finding of careful radiological-pathological correlation and the exclusion of history of breast cancer and atypical proliferative lesions [10, 13, 14, 16]. Studies that support the excision of RS by core biopsy reported higher rates of upgrade to malignancy or high-risk lesions in their results [7, 15].
The wide range of upstage rates and variable imaging techniques reported in the literature has led to different practice patterns. The reported low rate of upgrade to a malignancy with non-suspicious findings on mammography has led to the consideration of conservative management with radiographic follow-up [10, 11, 26]. Other groups support observation if they meet criteria of size < 1–2 cm, radiology-pathology concordance, no associated high-risk lesions, and not clinically palpable [12, 27]. In addition to meeting these criteria, others favor observation if able to obtain at least 6–12 core specimens using at least an 11-gauge needle [8, 12, 27, 28]. Most malignant neoplasms found on surgical excision that are associated with RS diagnosed by core biopsy are low nuclear grade or histologic grade 1 or 2 [7, 14, 25]. Our series was consistent with this finding with the exception of one patient who had high grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
Study limitations included a single institution cohort and inherent bias due to retrospective study design. A number of patients were excluded for various reasons, which may have biased our results. Other potential predictive factors, such as radiologic characteristics and number of specimens obtained per core biopsy were not evaluated.
The rate of identifying RS by core biopsy increased with DBT imaging compared to the rate with standard digital mammographic imaging, but the rates of identifying malignant neoplasm and high-risk lesions were not statistically different. Because our results showed that nearly one in five patients with radial scars by core biopsy with DBT imaging had a high-risk lesion confirmed surgically, we advocate that follow-up care should be commensurate with current guidelines and include discussion of chemoprevention. In our practice, we support excisional biopsy in the setting of RS identified by core biopsy.
Conclusion
Although the likelihood of identifying radial scars diagnosed by core biopsy has increased since the introduction of DBT imaging, the rates of identifying malignant neoplasms or high-risk lesions have remained stable. Given an upgrade rate to high-risk lesions of 22%, excisional biopsy of RS should be considered as these patients may benefit from chemoprevention and additional surveillance.
References
Schnitt S, Collins L (2017) Biopsy interpretation of the breast. vol 63. 3rd edn. (Epstein J (ed)). Boston: LWW; 2017
Tabar L, Dean P (2012) Teaching atlas of mammography, 4th edn. Thieme, New York
Orel SG, Evers K, Yeh IT, Troupin RH (1992) Radial scar with microcalcifications: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 183(2):479–482. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.183.2.1561353
Gaur S, Dialani V, Slanetz PJ, Eisenberg RL (2013) Architectural distortion of the breast. Am J Roentgenol 201(5):662–670. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.10153
Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Rodriguez-Soto J, Marzoni FA, Finkelstein SI, Shepard MJ (1999) Stereotactic, automated, large-core needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: false-negative and histologic underestimation rates after long-term follow-up. Radiology 210(3):799–805. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.210.3.r99mr19799
Philpotts LE, Shaheen NA, Jain KS et al (2000) Uncommon high-risk lesions of the breast diagnosed at stereotactic core-needle biopsy: clinical importance. Radiology 216(3):831–837. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.216.3.r00se31831
Linda A, Zuiani C, Furlan A et al (2010) Radial scars without atypia diagnosed at imaging-guided needle biopsy: how often is associated malignancy found at subsequent surgical excision, and do mammography and sonography predict which lesions are malignant? Am J Roentgenol 194(4):1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2326
Brenner RJ, Jackman RJ, Parker SH et al (2002) Percutaneous core needle biopsy of radial scars of the breast: when is excision necessary? Am J Roentgenol 179(5):1179–1184. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.179.5.1791179
Miller CL, West JA, Bettini AC et al (2014) Surgical excision of radial scars diagnosed by core biopsy may help predict future risk of breast cancer. Br Cancer Res Treat 145(2):331–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-014-2958-y
Conlon N, D’Arcy C, Kaplan JB et al (2015) Radial scar at image-guided needle biopsy: is excision necessary? Am J Surg Pathol 39(6):779–785. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000393
Matrai C, D’alfonso TM, Pharmer L et al (2015) Advocating nonsurgical management of patients with small, incidental radial scars at the time of needle core biopsy A Study of 77 cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med 139(9):1137–1142. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2014-0550-OA
Kim EMH, Hankins A, Cassity J et al (2016) Isolated radial scar diagnosis by core-needle biopsy: is surgical excision necessary? Springerplus 5(1):398. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-1993-z
Li Z, Ranade A, Zhao C (2016) Pathologic findings of follow-up surgical excision for radial scar on breast core needle biopsy. Hum Pathol 48:76–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2015.06.028
Chou WYY, Veis DJ, Aft R (2018) Radial scar on image-guided breast biopsy: is surgical excision necessary? Breast Cancer Res Treat 170(2):313–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4741-y
López-Medina A, Cintora E, Múgica B et al (2006) Radial scars diagnosed at stereotactic core-needle biopsy: surgical biopsy findings. Eur Radiol 16(8):1803–1810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0196-3
Miller CL, West JA, Bettini AC et al (2014) Surgical excision of radial scars diagnosed by core biopsy may help predict future risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 145(2):331–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-014-2958-y
Andacoglu O, Kanbour-Shakir A, Teh YC et al (2013) Rationale of excisional biopsy after the diagnosis of benign radial scar on core biopsy: a single institutional outcome analysis. Am J Clin Oncol Cancer Clin Trials 36(1):7–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0b013e3182354a3f
Noroozian M, Hadjiiski L, Rahnama-Moghadam S et al (2012) Digital breast tomosynthesis is comparable to mammographic spot views for mass characterization. Radiology 262(1):61–68. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11101763
Zuley ML, Bandos AI, Ganott MA et al (2013) Digital breast tomosynthesis versus supplemental diagnostic mammographic views for evaluation of noncalcified breast lesions. Radiology 266(1):89–95. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120552
Hooley RJ, Durand MA, Philpotts LE (2017) Advances in digital breast tomosynthesis. Am J Roentgenol 208(2):256–266. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.17127
Lourenco AP, Barry-Brooks M, Baird G et al (2015) Changes in recall type and patient treatment following implementation of screening digital breast tomosynthesis. Radiology 274(2):337–342. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14140317
Lång K, Nergården M, Andersson I et al (2016) False positives in breast cancer screening with one-view breast tomosynthesis: an analysis of findings leading to recall, work-up and biopsy rates in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial. Eur Radiol 26(11):3899–3907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4265-y
Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R et al (2013) Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology 267(1):47–56. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12121373
Sharpe RE, Venkataraman S, Phillips J et al (2016) Increased cancer detection rate and variations in the recall rate resulting from implementation of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis into a population-based screening program. Radiology 278(3):698–706. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015142036
Bianchi S, Giannotti E, Vanzi E et al (2012) Radial scar without associated atypical epithelial proliferation on image-guided 14-gauge needle core biopsy: Analysis of 49 cases from a single-centre and review of the literature. The Breast 21(2):159–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2011.09.005
Resetkova E, Edelweiss M, Albarracin CT, Yang WT (2011) Management of radial sclerosing lesions of the breast diagnosed using percutaneous vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy: recommendations for excision based on seven years’ of experience at a single institution. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127(2):335–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-008-0119-x
Racz JM, Carter JM, Degnim AC (2017) Challenging atypical breast lesions including flat epithelial atypia, radial scar, and intraductal papilloma. Ann Surg Oncol 24(10):2842–2847. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5980-6
Becker L, Trop I, David J et al (2006) Management of radial scars found at percutaneous breast biopsy. Can Assoc Radiol J 57(2):72–78. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16944680. Accessed July 15, 2018
Acknowledgements
We thank Geraldine M Chadwick, AuD, who provided medical writing support on behalf of the Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
This study has received ethical approval by the Carolinas HealthCare System Institutional Review Board as it satisfies requirements of 45 CFR 46 110, category #5.
Informed consent
This was a retrospective study. For this type of study, formal consent was not required by the IRB.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Phantana-angkool, A., Forster, M.R., Warren, Y.E. et al. Rate of radial scars by core biopsy and upgrading to malignancy or high-risk lesions before and after introduction of digital breast tomosynthesis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 173, 23–29 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4973-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4973-x