Greg Freiherr, Industry Consultant

Greg Freiherr has reported on developments in radiology since 1983. He runs the consulting service, The Freiherr Group.

Blog | Greg Freiherr, Industry Consultant | December 19, 2012

Legislating Women’s Health: A Chance for Radiologists to Step In

States increasingly are mandating that physicians inform patients with dense breasts that mammography may miss some signs of cancer. This trend provides radiologists with a chance to take a more direct role in patient care.

Five states now mandate physicians to inform women with dense breasts that mammography may be of limited value to them. These states — Connecticut, Virginia, Texas, California and New York — require physicians to advise patients that complementary imaging studies, such as ultrasound or MRI, may be needed, if dense fibroglandular tissues are likely to obscure the mammographic signs of cancer. Their laws, however, do not say specifically who should inform patients — the physician who interprets the mammogram or the physician who regularly attends the patient.

This quandary is ready-made for radiologists. Because mammography is a screening exam, patients are seldom referred to radiologists for such studies. Instead the patients themselves typically make the appointments and are then informed by the radiologist of the results.

Only a month ago, radiologists were encouraged by the RSNA president to consider imaging patients on their own and to take a more active role in their care. The recognition of breast density as a complicating factor in women’s health presents the opportunity to act on this advice.

Radiologists can play a pivotal role in the care of women with dense breasts, according to Stamatia Destounis, M.D., an attending radiologist at Elizabeth Wende Breast Clinic in Rochester, New York.

“We want to do this right — we want to educate and inform patients without causing a lot of undue stress and anxiety and fear and we have to try to do (additional testing) that is appropriate in a cost-effective manner,” she told me.

Ultrasound and MRI are the two options. Ultrasound is low cost and widely available. But it is very sensitive and can produce false negatives demonstrated on biopsy. MRI might be indicated, if patients are high-risk due to family history or the presence of the BRC1 or BRC2 gene. This modality is also very sensitive and can lead to biopsies that are negative.

Clearly, to provide optimal care, several challenges must be met. One is to identify patients with dense breasts, identification that is heavily dependent on the skills of the interpreter. The second challenge is to choose the best method for additional testing. The third is correctly interpreting follow-on tests to minimize the number of biopsies.  The fourth is to maintain communication with the patient throughout the diagnostic process — to keep patients informed and not unduly alarmed.

Rhetorically, you might ask, who better to meet these challenges than radiologists? And what better time to act than now, when organized radiology is pushing its members to take a higher profile in the care of patients?

The question without an obvious answer is whether radiologists, who for so long have taken a back seat in the practice of medicine, will act on this opportunity.

Related Content

News | Breast Imaging | September 20, 2021
September 20, 2021 — ImageCare Centers is unveiling its new “PINK Better Mammo” service with the addition of...
This is an example of 3-D ultrasound imaging on a breast, designed to help increase efficiency and diagnostic accuracy in any practice. Image courtesy of Hologic.

This is an example of TriVu ultrasound imaging on a breast, designed to help increase efficiency and diagnostic accuracy in any practice. Image courtesy of Hologic.

Feature | Breast Imaging | September 15, 2021 | By Jennifer Meade
The...
While the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) and the introduction of EQUIP (Enhancing Quality Using the Inspection Program) have been successful in standardizing and enhancing mammographic imaging quality, inadequate breast positioning can dramatically impact the ability of radiologists and technicians to quickly and accurately detect breast cancer and potentially malignant lesions in their patients

Getty Images

Feature | Mammography | September 15, 2021 | By Christopher Austin, M.D. and Randy D. Hicks, M.D., MBA
Plan to attend RSNA21 at McCormick Place Chicago, Nov. 28 – Dec. 2, 2021

Getty Images

News | RSNA | September 13, 2021
September 13, 2021 — The Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) today announced highlights of the Technical Exh
According to ARRS’ American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR), immediately reading screening mammograms during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic promises a new and improved paradigm—reducing care disparities, while increasing the speed of diagnostic workup.

Flow Chart of Patient Selection

News | Breast Imaging | September 09, 2021
September 9, 202
Laws designed to help women with increased risk for missed breast cancer diagnoses may help catch the disease earlier, according to Penn State College of Medicine researchers.

Getty Images | AleksandarNakic

News | Breast Imaging | September 09, 2021
September 9, 2021 — Laws designed to help women with increased risk for...
The researchers say there is currently a lack of good quality evidence to support a policy of replacing human radiologists with artificial intelligence (AI) technology when screening for breast cancer.

Getty Images

News | Artificial Intelligence | September 02, 2021
September 2, 2021 — Humans still seem to be better than technology when it comes to the accuracy of spotting possible
Building on prior success combining Cyclin-Dependent Kinase (CDK) inhibitors with hormone therapy to treat breast cancer, researchers are now exploring the potential integration of CDK inhibitors with radiotherapy

Schematic overview of cell cycle regulation, with an emphasis on radiotherapy-induced pathways and CDK/cyclin regulation. In M phase and in G2 resting phase, cancer cells are respectively very sensitive and moderately sensitive to radiation injury, whereas in G1 phase and in S phase, cancer cells are moderately resistant to radiation injury. Irradiation induces G1 and G2 cell cycle checkpoint activation and DNA repair. Most cancer cells are defective in G1 checkpoint, commonly due to the mutations/alterations of the key regulators of the G1 checkpoint, but contain a functional G2 checkpoint. Figure courtesy of The International Journal of Molecular Sciences

News | Radiation Therapy | August 18, 2021
August 18, 2021 — Building on prior success combining Cyclin-Dependent Kinase (CDK) inhibitors with hormone therapy t