Staging for Breast Cancer: A Nationwide Survey about Adherence to Guidelines in German Breast Centers

Introduction: The risk for metastasis at primary diagnosis of breast cancer is about 4%. The German guidelines give clear indications for when, whom and how to stage breast cancer patients. Ideally, this should be done via CAT scan of the thorax and abdomen and an additional bone scan. But daily practice shows that the way health care providers handle staging recommendations can vary. To objectify adherence to guidelines we started a nation-wide survey. Methods: Between July and September 2020 we sent out a survey via email to all certified and non certified breast centers and in addition to all Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology in Germany. We asked for timing of staging, conditions that cause staging and the applied method. In case we did not get back any reply we sent out a reminder. Results: A total of 220 certified breast centers/28 non-certified breast center/48 Departments of Gynecology and Obstetrics who care for breast cancer patients took part in our survey. A general pre-therapeutic staging was performed in 16,4%/39,3%/66,7% of all institutions and a general post-operative staging was performed in 4,1%/0%/6,3% of each institutional type, respectively. In terms of the applied method, 75% of all certified breast centers used a CAT scan and bone scan, while 23,3% primarily use chest x-ray, ultrasound of the abdomen (27,7%) or MRI. As a potential reason for using x-ray and ultrasound the presence of a „low-risk“ breast cancer was mentioned. Summary: Although certified breast centers show the highest adherence to current guidelines, some still perform a general staging or do not use the recommended staging method. The low probability for primary metastatic breast cancer and the use of a reasonable exposure to radiation warrant a critical discussion.

Impact of COVID-19 on Breast Imaging Practice Operations and Recovery Efforts: A North American Study

Objective To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast imaging facilities’ operations and recovery efforts across North America. Methods A survey on breast imaging facilities’ operations and strategies for recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic was distributed to the membership of the Society of Breast Imaging and National Consortium of Breast Centers from June 4, 2020, to July 14, 2020. A descriptive summary of responses was performed. Comparisons were made between demographic variables of respondents and questions of interest using a Pearson chi-square test. Results There were 473 survey respondents (response rate of 13%). The majority of respondents (70%; 332/473) reported 80%–100% breast imaging volume reduction, with 94% (447/473) reporting postponement of screening mammography. The majority of respondents (97%; 457/473) continued to perform biopsies. There were regional differences in safety measures taken for staff (P = 0.004), with practices in the West more likely reporting no changes in the work environment compared to other regions. The most common changes to patients’ experience included spacing out of furniture in waiting rooms (94%; 445/473), limiting visitors (91%; 430/473), and spacing out appointments (83%). A significantly higher proportion of practices in the Northeast (95%; 104/109) initiated patient scheduling changes compared to other regions (P = 0.004). Conclusion COVID-19 had an acute impact on breast imaging facilities. Although common national operational patterns emerged, geographic variability was notable in particular in recovery efforts. These findings may inform future best practices for delivering breast imaging care amid the ongoing and geographically shifting COVID-19 pandemic.

Surgical Trends in Breast Cancer in Turkey: An Increase in Breast-Conserving Surgery

PURPOSE Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer in women, and there is a great variability in surgical practice for treating that cancer in different countries. The aims of this study were to analyze the effect of guidelines from the Turkish Federation of Breast Diseases Societies on academic institutions that have breast centers and to evaluate surgical practice in Turkey in 2018. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between January and March 2019, a survey was sent to breast surgeons who were working in breast centers in academic institutions. The sampling frame included 24 academic institutions with breast centers in 18 cities in Turkey to evaluate interdisciplinary differences among breast centers and seven regions in Turkey regarding patients’ choices, surgical approaches, and academic institutions. RESULTS All surgeons responded to the survey, and all 4,381 patients were included. Most of the surgeons (73.9%) were working in a breast center. Multidisciplinary tumor boards were performed in 87% of the breast centers. The average time between clinical evaluation and initiation of treatment was 29 days; the longest time was in Southeast Anatolia (66 days). Only 6% of patients had ductal carcinoma in situ. Sentinel lymph node biopsy was available in every region across the country and was performed in 64.5% of the patients. In 2018, the overall breast-conserving surgery rate was 57.3% in Turkey, and it varied from 72.2% in the Black Sea region to 33.5% in Central Anatolia ( P < .001). Oncoplastic breast surgery options were available at all breast centers. However, 25% of the breast centers from the Black Sea region and half the breast centers from Eastern Anatolia and the Mediterranean region did not perform this type of surgery. CONCLUSION Increasing rates of nonpalpable breast cancer and decreasing rates of locoregional recurrences favored breast-conserving surgery, especially in developed countries. Guidelines from the Turkish Federation of Breast Diseases Societies resulted in more comprehensive breast centers and improved breast health in Turkey.

Elite VABB 13G: A New Ultrasound-Guided Wireless Biopsy System for Breast Lesions. Technical Characteristics and Comparison with Respect to Traditional Core-Biopsy 14–16G Systems

The typification of breast lumps with fine-needle biopsies is often affected by inconclusive results that extend diagnostic time. Many breast centers have progressively substituted cytology with micro-histology. The aim of this study is to assess the performance of a 13G-needle biopsy using cable-free vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) technology. Two of our operators carried out 200 micro-histological biopsies using the Elite 13G-needle VABB and 1314 14–16G-needle core biopsies (CBs) on BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions. Thirty-one of the procedures were repeated following CB, eighteen following cytological biopsy, and three after undergoing both procedures. The VABB Elite procedure showed high diagnostic performance with an accuracy of 94.00%, a sensitivity of 92.30%, and a specificity of 100%, while the diagnostic underestimation was 11.00%, all significantly comparable to of the CB procedure. The VABB Elite 13G system has been shown to be a simple, rapid, reliable, and well-tolerated biopsy procedure, without any significant complications and with a diagnostic performance comparable to traditional CB procedures. The histological class change in an extremely high number of samples would suggest the use of this procedure as a second-line biopsy for suspect cases or those with indeterminate cyto-histological results.