Abbreviated Versus Full-Protocol MRI for Breast Cancer Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response Assessment: Diagnostic...

BACKGROUND. Abbreviated protocols could allow wider adoption of MRI in patients undergoing breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). However, abbreviated MRI has been explored primarily in screening settings. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to compare diagnostic performance of abbreviated MRI and full-protocol MRI for evaluation of breast cancer NAC response, stratifying by radiologists' breast imaging expertise. METHODS. This retrospective study included 203 patients with breast cancer (mean age, 52.1 ± 11.2 [SD] years) from two hospitals who underwent MRI before NAC initiation and after NAC completion before surgical resection from March 2017 to April 2021. Abbreviated MRI was extracted from full-protocol MRI and included the axial T2-weighted sequence and precontrast and single early postcontrast T1-weighted sequences. Three general radiologists and three breast radiologists independently interpreted abbreviated and full-protocol MRI in separate sessions, identifying enhancing lesions to indicate residual tumor and measuring lesion size. The reference standard was presence and size of residual tumor on pathologic assessment of post-NAC surgical specimens. RESULTS. A total of 50 of 203 patients had pathologic complete response (pCR). Intraobserver and interobserver agreement for abbreviated and full-protocol MRI for general and breast radiologists ranged from substantial to nearly perfect (κ = 0.70-0.81). Abbreviated MRI compared with full-protocol MRI showed no significant difference for general radiologists in sensitivity (54.7% vs 57.3%, p > .99), specificity (92.8% vs 95.6%, p = .29), or accuracy (83.4% vs 86.2%, p = .30), nor for breast radiologists in sensitivity (60.0% vs 61.3%, p > .99), specificity (94.6% vs 97.4%, p = .22), or accuracy (86.0% vs 88.5%, p = .30). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were not significantly different between protocols for any reader individually (p > .05). Mean difference in residual tumor size on MRI relative to pathology for abbreviated protocol ranged for general radiologists from -0.19 to 0.03 mm and for breast radiologists from -0.15 to -0.05 mm, and for full protocol ranged for general radiologists from 0.57 to 0.65 mm and for breast radiologists from 0.66 to 0.79 mm. CONCLUSION. Abbreviated compared with full-protocol MRI showed similar intraobserver and interobserver agreement and no significant difference in diagnostic performance. Full-protocol MRI but not abbreviated MRI slightly overestimated pathologic tumor sizes. CLINICAL IMPACT. Abbreviated protocols may facilitate use of MRI for post-NAC response assessment by general and breast radiologists.