OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive value of BI-RADS™ categories 3, 4 and 5 in non-palpable breast masses assessed by mammography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with BI-RADS categories 3, 4 and 5 nonpalpable breast masses identified by mammograms were submitted to complementary ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging studies, besides excisional biopsy. In total, 30 biopsies were performed. The lesions as well as their respective BI-RADS classification into 3, 4 and 5 were correlated with the histopathological results. The predictive values calculation was made by means of specific mathematical equations. RESULTS: Negative predictive values for category 3 were: mammography, 69.23%; ultrasound, 70.58%; and magnetic resonance imaging, 100%. Positive predictive values for category 4 were: mammography, 63.63%; ultrasound, 50%; and magnetic resonance imaging, 30.76%. For category 5, positive predictive values were: mammography and ultrasound, 100%; and magnetic resonance imaging, 92.85%. CONCLUSION: For category 3, the negative predictive value of magnetic resonance imaging was high, and for categories 4 and 5, the positive predictive values of the three modalities were moderate.

Keywords: BI-RADS, Breast cancer, Mammography, Predictive value

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the BI-RADS as a predictive factor of suspicion for malignancy in breast lesions by correlating radiological with histological results and calculating the positive predictive value for categories 3, 4 and 5 in a breast cancer reference center in the city of São Paulo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective, analytical and cross-sectional study including 725 patients with mammographic and/or sonographic findings classified as BI-RADS categories 3, 4 and 5 who were referred to the authors' institution to undergo percutaneous biopsy. The tests results were reviewed and the positive predictive value was calculated by means of a specific mathematical equation. RESULTS: Positive predictive values found for categories 3, 4 and 5 were respectively the following: 0.74%, 33.08% and 92.95%, for cases submitted to ultrasound-guided biopsy, and 0.00%, 14.90% and 100% for cases submitted to stereotactic biopsy. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated high suspicion for malignancy in lesions classified as category 5 and low risk for category 3. As regards category 4, the need for systematic biopsies was observed.

Keywords: Breast cancer; BI-RADS; Percutaneous biopsy; Positive predictive value; Histological diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: Undertaking of a complete audit of the service of mammography, as recommended by BI-RADS^®, in a private reference institution for breast cancer diagnosis in the city of São Paulo, SP, Brazil, and comparison of results with those recommended by the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective, analytical and cross-sectional study including 8,000 patients submitted to mammography in the period between April 2010 and March 2011, whose results were subjected to an internal audit. The patients were followed-up until December 2012. RESULTS: The radiological classification of 7,249 screening mammograms, according to BI-RADS, was the following: category 0 (1.43%), 1 (7.82%), 2 (80.76%), 3 (8.35%), 4 (1.46%), 5 (0.15%) and 6 (0.03%). The breast cancer detection ratio was 4.8 cases per 1,000 mammograms. Ductal carcinoma in situ was found in 22.8% of cases. Positive predictive values for categories 3, 4 and 5 were 1.3%, 41.3% and 100%, respectively. In the present study, the sensitivity of the method was 97.1% and specificity, 97.4%. CONCLUSION: The complete internal audit of a service of mammography is essential to evaluate the quality of such service, which reflects on an early breast cancer detection and reduction of mortality rates.

Keywords: Breast cancer; Mammographic screening; BI-RADS; Audit of mammography service; Percutaneous biopsy; Positive predictive value.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rates of diagnostic underestimation at stereotactic percutaneous core needle biopsies (CNB) and vacuum-assisted biopsies (VABB) of nonpalpable breast lesions, with histopathological results of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) subsequently submitted to surgical excision. As a secondary objective, the frequency of ADH and DCIS was determined for the cases submitted to biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of 40 cases with diagnosis of ADH or DCIS on the basis of biopsies performed between February 2011 and July 2013, subsequently submitted to surgery, whose histopathological reports were available in the internal information system. Biopsy results were compared with those observed at surgery and the underestimation rate was calculated by means of specific mathematical equations. RESULTS: The underestimation rate at CNB was 50% for ADH and 28.57% for DCIS, and at VABB it was 25% for ADH and 14.28% for DCIS. ADH represented 10.25% of all cases undergoing biopsy, whereas DCIS accounted for 23.91%. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic underestimation rate at CNB is two times the rate at VABB. Certainty that the target has been achieved is not the sole determining factor for a reliable diagnosis. Removal of more than 50% of the target lesion should further reduce the risk of underestimation.

Keywords: Breast neoplasia; Core needle biopsy; Vacuum-assisted biopsy; Diagnostic techniques and procedures; Noninvasive intraductal carcinoma.