Breast MRI: False-Negative Results and Missed Opportunities.
Abstract
Breast MRI is the most sensitive modality for the detection of breast cancer. However, false-negative cases may occur, in which the cancer is not visualized at MRI and is instead diagnosed with another imaging modality. The authors describe the causes of false-negative breast MRI results, which can be categorized broadly as secondary to perceptual errors or cognitive errors, or nonvisualization secondary to nonenhancement of the tumor. Tips and strategies to avoid these errors are discussed. Perceptual errors occur when an abnormality is not prospectively identified, yet the examination is technically adequate. Careful development of thorough search patterns is critical to avoid these errors. Cognitive errors occur when an abnormality is identified but misinterpreted or mischaracterized as benign. The radiologist may avoid these errors by utilizing all available prior examinations for comparison, viewing images in all planes to better assess the margins and shapes of abnormalities, and appropriately integrating all available information from the contrast-enhanced, T2-weighted, and T1-weighted images as well as the clinical history. Despite this, false-negative cases are inevitable, as certain subtypes of breast cancer, including ductal carcinoma in situ, invasive lobular carcinoma, and certain well-differentiated invasive cancers, may demonstrate little to no enhancement at MRI, owing to differences in angiogenesis and neovascularity. MRI is a valuable diagnostic tool in breast imaging. However, MRI should continue to be used as a complementary modality, with mammography and US, in the detection of breast cancer. ©RSNA, 2021
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Missing lesions smaller than 5 mm in early-stage tumor screening can have serious consequences for patient outcomes, as false negatives directly compromise diagnostic and therapeutic decisions.
“in early-stage tumor screening, missing lesions smaller than 5 mmcan have serious consequences for patient outcomes, as false negatives directly compromise diagnostic and therapeutic decisions (Korhonen et al. 2021; Luo et al. 2023).”
From Conformal Lesion Segmentation for 3D Medical Images (2025) · cites this paper as Korhonen et al. 2021
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Conformal Lesion Segmentation for 3D Medical Images
Tan, B., Wang, Z., Duan, J., Xu, K., Shen, H. T., Shi, X., & Shen, F. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.17897
- Authors
- Korhonen, K. E., Zuckerman, S. P., Weinstein, S. P., Tobey, J., Birnbaum, J. A., McDonald, E. S., & Conant, E. F.
- Affiliations
- Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- RadioGraphics
- Published
- 2021-05
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 645-664
- ISSN
- 0271-5333 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1323
- OpenAlex
- W3136359523
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 2.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Radiographics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › MRI in cancer diagnosis
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Breast Lesions and Carcinomas
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Digital Radiography and Breast Imaging
- Keywords
- breast MRI, false-negative results, breast cancer detection, perceptual errors, cognitive errors, search patterns, tumor enhancement, ductal carcinoma in situ, invasive lobular carcinoma, angiogenesis, neovascularization, mammography, breast ultrasound
- MeSH terms
- Breast, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Mammography, Sensitivity and Specificity, Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review