E.U.

Usually the answer is yes, though age and other medical conditions will change a patient’s personal risk and benefit considerations and therefore screening recommendations may change from one year to the next. Technology is changing and guidelines also evolve which influence recommendations.

Molecular Breast Imaging (MBI) is a specialized nuclear medicine breast imaging technique that requires intravenous injection of a radiopharmaceutical, typically 99mTc-sestamibi. Sestamibi has been in common use as a tracer for nuclear cardiology studies for over 30 years and has an extremely low risk of adverse reactions and no contraindications. Low-dose molecular breast imaging has been used with excellent results by Mayo Clinic and a few other centers for screening women with dense breasts, showing another 7 to 8 cancers after a normal mammogram for every thousand women screened [1-3].

MBI can also be useful as a diagnostic tool in women who have dense breasts and symptoms such as a lump or vague abnormality on mammography that in rare cases cannot be sorted out with additional views or ultrasound. MBI can also be helpful for some women who need but cannot have an MRI [4]. As of the most recent review in 2017, the American College of Radiology Practice Parameter for Molecular Breast Imaging [5] suggests MBI is a potential option for supplemental screening in high-risk women and those with dense breasts who cannot undergo MRI, but it is usually not indicated, as the technique involves ionizing radiation to the whole body with attendant risk of potentially inducing cancer [6]. MBI is never used in women who are pregnant.

The radiation exposure from low-dose MBI, performed with a delivered dose of 6 to 8 mCi 99mTc-sestamibi, is higher than that from a mammogram. Further, mammography delivers radiation to the breast only, while MBI delivers radiation to the whole body. In order to compare radiation doses from these different types of exams, a standard calculation called “effective radiation dose” is used, which takes into account which body parts are exposed to radiation by a given test and how sensitive every exposed organ is to radiation. Effective dose has units of milli-Sieverts (mSv). The effective dose of mammography is about 0.5 mSv and the effective dose from a low-dose MBI is about 1.8 to 2.4 mSv. For comparison, the radiation dose received from normal daily life is between 3 and 10 mSv per year, depending on where you live [7, 8]. Below effective doses of 100 mSv, no health risks from radiation have been proven according to national and international radiation physics experts [9-11].

Chart 1. This graph shows the whole body effective radiation doses from common breast screening exams: 2D mammography; 3D (tomosynthesis) mammography with synthetic 2D; 2D combined with 3D mammography; contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM); and molecular breast imaging (MBI). MBI, with the highest dose, at 2 mSv, is below the range of annual background radiation exposure in the USA. The annual limit for radiation workers is 50 mSv. At doses below 100 mSv, no risks have been proven, and benefits to patients outweigh any possible risks. Any risk from radiation is greater in younger individuals, especially those under the age of 30, and radiation exposure should always be minimized (except when undergoing cancer treatment).

No. According to the FDA, “There is no valid scientific data to demonstrate that thermography devices, when used on their own or with another diagnostic test, are an effective screening tool for any medical condition including the early detection of breast cancer or other diseases and health conditions [1].”

Thermography is a non-invasive technique that uses infrared technology to detect both heat and blood flow patterns very near the skin’s surface. Although some large cancers can be seen, these are usually palpable and so thermography adds little. Thermography has a high “false negative” rate (when a test result indicates “no cancer” – though cancer is actually present), especially for small breast cancers, so it does not play a role in screening asymptomatic women. Thermography also has a high rate of “indeterminate” findings, which on additional diagnostic evaluation (mammography, ultrasound, MRI, follow-up observation, etc.) indicate no cancer is found. These often prompt a recommendation for short interval follow-up, which creates anxiety and additional cost to the woman.

The answer is essentially “yes”. At the population level, there is a tendency for slight decrease in breast density each year, and this tends to be more abrupt in the few years around menopause. One study [1] showed that only 7% of women who were considered not dense one year were classified as “dense” the following year; similarly 6% of women considered “dense” one year were classified as not dense the following year. For 87% of women, there was no change from one year to the next. Any difference that might affect the decision for supplemental screening would be between women considered to have heterogeneously dense or scattered fibroglandular density one year or the other, and radiologists may differ in this assessment even when there is no true change in the breasts. In a patient with breast density near the threshold, there are likely to be areas in the breast where cancer could be masked: it is not unreasonable to have had supplemental screening even if one’s breasts turn out to be slightly less dense this year.

What is it?
Breast PET uses an injection of a short-lived radioactive sugar (¹⁸FDG) into the body to detect metabolically active lesions such as cancer. PET, or more often PET-CT, is commonly used to stage the whole body in patients with larger breast cancers or suspected recurrence. Newer technologies can provide detailed PET images of the breasts to assess local extent of breast cancer.

How it works
The radioactive sugar accumulates in cancer cells in the breast and emits high-energy positron radiation that is detected and analyzed. For one such system, the patient is seated and the breast is gently stabilized; positioning is otherwise like mammography (Fig. PET-1).

Benefits
Breast PET is generally considered a diagnostic test used to determine the extent of cancer within the breasts, and can be used as an alternative to breast MRI for that purpose [1, 2]. In women with newly diagnosed breast cancer being treated with chemotherapy prior to surgery, breast PET can also help monitor response to treatment. In addition, breast PET may help distinguish recurrence of cancer from scar in women who have been previously treated for breast cancer. Uncommonly, it can be used for problem solving (Fig. PET-3). It is a relatively new modality and not widely available.

Considerations
Breast PET exposes the patient to a moderately high whole body radiation dose and is not used for screening [3]. The very back part of the breast near the chest wall and the axillary lymph nodes are better evaluated with MRI.