2024
Multimodality Imaging of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction Techniques, Complications, and Tumor Recurrence.
Thai J, Sodagari F, Colwell A, Winograd J, Revzin M, Mahmoud H, Mozayan S, Chou S, Destounis S, Butler R. Multimodality Imaging of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction Techniques, Complications, and Tumor Recurrence. RadioGraphics 2024, 44: e230070. PMID: 38573814, DOI: 10.1148/rg.230070.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsTumor recurrencePostoperative evaluation of patientsFlap reconstruction methodsImplant-based reconstructionMultimodal imagingBreast reconstruction techniquesFat graft placementBreast cancer recurrenceTissue flap reconstructionEvaluation of patientsNipple-sparing techniquesTissue donor sitesFlap-based reconstructionNipple-areolar complex reconstructionDiagnostic breast imagingUnique patient populationAutologous tissue flapsAbnormal imaging appearancesBreast cancer screeningMastectomy optionLocal recurrenceOncoplastic surgeryDisease recurrenceFlap reconstructionReconstructed breast
2023
Editorial Comment: Artificial Intelligence May Help Define Screening Strategies in Patients With Dense Breasts.
Butler R. Editorial Comment: Artificial Intelligence May Help Define Screening Strategies in Patients With Dense Breasts. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2023, 222: e2330042. PMID: 37556603, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.23.30042.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchPACS-integrated machine learning breast density classifier: clinical validation
Lewin J, Schoenherr S, Seebass M, Lin M, Philpotts L, Etesami M, Butler R, Durand M, Heller S, Heacock L, Moy L, Tocino I, Westerhoff M. PACS-integrated machine learning breast density classifier: clinical validation. Clinical Imaging 2023, 101: 200-205. PMID: 37421715, DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2023.06.023.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchModern Challenges in Assessing Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Call for Added Resources.
Hooley R, Butler R. Modern Challenges in Assessing Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Call for Added Resources. Radiology 2023, 306: e230145. PMID: 36749216, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.230145.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2022
Optoacoustic Imaging With Decision Support for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A 15-Reader Retrospective Study.
Seiler S, Neuschler E, Butler R, Lavin P, Dogan B. Optoacoustic Imaging With Decision Support for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A 15-Reader Retrospective Study. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2022, 220: 646-658. PMID: 36475811, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.22.28470.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2020
Screening Breast Ultrasound: Update After 10 Years of Breast Density Notification Laws.
Butler RS, Hooley RJ. Screening Breast Ultrasound: Update After 10 Years of Breast Density Notification Laws. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2020, 214: 1424-1435. PMID: 32182096, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.19.22275.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2019
Optoacoustic Imaging and Gray-Scale US Features of Breast Cancers: Correlation with Molecular Subtypes.
Dogan BE, Menezes GLG, Butler RS, Neuschler EI, Aitchison R, Lavin PT, Tucker FL, Grobmyer SR, Otto PM, Stavros AT. Optoacoustic Imaging and Gray-Scale US Features of Breast Cancers: Correlation with Molecular Subtypes. Radiology 2019, 292: 564-572. PMID: 31287388, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019182071.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsBreast cancer molecular subtypesHuman epidermal growth factor receptorLuminal breast cancerCancer molecular subtypesUS featuresEpidermal growth factor receptorMolecular subtypesGrowth factor receptorBreast cancerProspective multi-institutional studyFactor receptorLogistic regression analysisMulti-institutional studyLogistic regression modelsMultinomial logistic regression analysisGray-scale USMultinomial logistic regression modelsImmunohistochemistry findingsMean ageInvasive cancerPathologic diagnosisPathology reportsUS scoreKruskal-Wallis testCancer subtypes
2018
Optoacoustic Breast Imaging: Imaging-Pathology Correlation of Optoacoustic Features in Benign and Malignant Breast Masses.
Butler R, Lavin PT, Tucker FL, Barke LD, Böhm-Vélez M, Destounis S, Grobmyer SR, Katzen J, Kist KA, Makariou EV, Schilling KJ, Young CA, Dogan BE, Neuschler EI. Optoacoustic Breast Imaging: Imaging-Pathology Correlation of Optoacoustic Features in Benign and Malignant Breast Masses. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2018, 211: 1155-1170. PMID: 30106610, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.17.18435.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchDowngrading and Upgrading Gray-Scale Ultrasound BI-RADS Categories of Benign and Malignant Masses With Optoacoustics: A Pilot Study.
Neuschler EI, Lavin PT, Tucker FL, Barke LD, Bertrand ML, Böhm-Vélez M, Destounis S, Dogan BE, Grobmyer SR, Katzen J, Kist KA, Makariou EV, Parris TM, Young CA, Butler R. Downgrading and Upgrading Gray-Scale Ultrasound BI-RADS Categories of Benign and Malignant Masses With Optoacoustics: A Pilot Study. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2018, 211: 689-700. PMID: 29975115, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.17.18436.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2017
A Pivotal Study of Optoacoustic Imaging to Diagnose Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists
Neuschler EI, Butler R, Young CA, Barke LD, Bertrand ML, Böhm-Vélez M, Destounis S, Donlan P, Grobmyer SR, Katzen J, Kist KA, Lavin PT, Makariou EV, Parris TM, Schilling KJ, Tucker FL, Dogan BE. A Pivotal Study of Optoacoustic Imaging to Diagnose Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists. Radiology 2017, 287: 172228. PMID: 29178816, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017172228.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsProbability of malignancyNegative likelihood ratioGrayscale ultrasonographyIndependent readersMalignant breast massesBreast massesBlinded independent readersMalignant massesBI-RADS 3Negative predictive valueData System (BI-RADS) categoryBreast Imaging ReportingBI-RADS categoryLikelihood ratioOA featuresHistologic findingsBI-RADS categoriesNegative examinationsPretest probabilityProtocol deviationsHistologic resultsOnline supplemental materialUltrasonographyDiagnostic utilityPredictive value
2016
Tomosynthesis in the Diagnostic Setting: Changing Rates of BI-RADS Final Assessment over Time.
Raghu M, Durand MA, Andrejeva L, Goehler A, Michalski MH, Geisel JL, Hooley RJ, Horvath LJ, Butler R, Forman HP, Philpotts LE. Tomosynthesis in the Diagnostic Setting: Changing Rates of BI-RADS Final Assessment over Time. Radiology 2016, 281: 54-61. PMID: 27139264, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016151999.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2015
Invited Commentary: The Breast Density Dilemma—Challenges, Lessons, and Future Directions
Butler RS. Invited Commentary: The Breast Density Dilemma—Challenges, Lessons, and Future Directions. RadioGraphics 2015, 35: 324-6. PMID: 25763720, DOI: 10.1148/rg.352140276.Peer-Reviewed Original Research
2013
Where does radioimmunotherapy fit in the management of breast cancer?
Doddamane I, Butler R, Jhaveri A, Chung GG, Cheng D. Where does radioimmunotherapy fit in the management of breast cancer? Immunotherapy 2013, 5: 895-904. PMID: 23902558, DOI: 10.2217/imt.13.78.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerSelection of patientsMultiple organ involvementSolitary metastatic lesionUnpredictable clinical behaviorDifferent clinical presentationsCurative optionOrgan involvementClinical presentationMetastatic lesionsClinical behaviorHeterogeneous diseaseCurrent managementPrognostic modelCancerBiological heterogeneityMain causePatientsMalignancyLesionsRadioimmunotherapyDiseaseWomenResponse.
Hooley RJ, Greenberg K, Stackhouse RM, Geisel J, Butler R, Philpotts LE. Response. Radiology 2013, 266: 998-9. PMID: 23550287.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchBreast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: imaging modalities and pregnancy-associated breast cancer.
Vashi R, Hooley R, Butler R, Geisel J, Philpotts L. Breast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: imaging modalities and pregnancy-associated breast cancer. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2013, 200: 321-8. PMID: 23345353, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.12.9814.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchBreast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: physiologic changes and common benign entities.
Vashi R, Hooley R, Butler R, Geisel J, Philpotts L. Breast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: physiologic changes and common benign entities. American Journal Of Roentgenology 2013, 200: 329-36. PMID: 23345354, DOI: 10.2214/ajr.12.9845.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsPhysiologic changesCommon benign breast diseasesPregnancy-associated breast cancerBenign breast diseaseCommon benign entitiesBenign breast abnormalitiesBreast diseaseImaging featuresBenign entityPatient managementBreast cancerBreast abnormalitiesBreast imagingPregnancyHistologicCancerAbnormalitiesBreastDisease
2012
Screening US in Patients with Mammographically Dense Breasts: Initial Experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41
Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in Patients with Mammographically Dense Breasts: Initial Experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology 2012, 265: 59-69. PMID: 22723501, DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12120621.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsPositive predictive valueOverall positive predictive valueBI-RADS category 4BI-RADS category 3Breast ultrasonographyDense breastsBreast cancerOverall cancer detection rateHIPAA-compliant retrospective reviewData System (BI-RADS) category 1Occult breast cancerCancer detection rateWhole-breast ultrasonographyCategory 4Category 3Dense breast tissueBreast Imaging ReportingPostmenopausal patientsIntermediate riskRetrospective reviewRisk groupsUS examinationHigh riskGeneral populationLower risk