I am in the breast imaging business to help to find small breast cancers, but the little ones are tough to identify sometimes.
Yesterday was a busy day in the mammography screening world. One technologist commented, “It looks like the beginning of the July to January mammo push.” I don’t know whether to be excited at the possibility of finding occult breast cancers for more women, or to be a bit scared of the increased opportunities for missing a small breast cancer.
I am in the breast imaging business to help to find small breast cancers. Statistics indicate that treatment of breast cancers smaller than 1 cm gives the woman a 99 percent chance of living a life as if she had never had breast cancer.
So sometimes I wonder what is the point of debating whether a cancer will kill a woman or not. It’s kind of a conundrum. If the parameters used to decide if a cancer is a killing cancer are 100 percent reliable and 100 percent accurate in prediction, then analyzing a cancer for its effect on mortality would be useful. However, the evaluation of cancers for killing potential is not a useable technology at the present time. So, I rely on trying to find cancers smaller than 1 cm to help women to live normal lives in spite of their breast cancer.
The little ones are tough to identify sometimes. They do not have typical appearances. They easily hide amongst the fibroglandular densities, protruding slightly from the contour of the tissue or appearing in a small previously fatty area. Sometimes time tells the story when a small nondescript nodule declares itself with speculated margins and increased density. Using the 20/20 retrospectoscope is disconcerting because the small nondescript density usually can be seen, benignly sitting amongst other similar breast densities.
Radiologists do miss lesions on screening mammograms. Leonard Berlin, MD, in his book “Malpractice Issues in Radiology” quotes studies indicating of miss rates of 25 percent. The itty-bittys just don’t stand out in the crowd.
I’ll just keep trying to find the little ones anyway. Happy beginning of screening mammography season!
Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Dense Breasts: What a New Meta-Analysis Reveals
May 1st 2024The 10-study meta-analysis demonstrated that contrast-enhanced mammography has a 95 percent sensitivity rate and an 81 percent specificity rate for diagnosing suspicious lesions in women with dense breasts.
New Literature Review Finds ChatGPT Effective in Radiology in 84 Percent of Studies
April 29th 2024While noting a variety of pitfalls with the chatbot ranging from hallucinations to improper citations, the review authors found the use of ChatGPT in radiology demonstrated “high performance” in 37 out of 44 studies.