Hi, Thanks for writing in. You have a valid point in your query. Why should some radiologists pass your condition as harmless and rest still have an element of doubt? All this after having 4 biopsies done and each of them showing benign findings. Experience surely counts with radiologists and so does knowledge updates. The American College of Radiology follows the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas (BI-RADS® Atlas) to categorize breast findings on X ray Mammography, Ultrasound and MRI, separately. It is said that at least X ray Mammography and Ultrasound must be done and both findings assessed together. Breast calcifications are assessed following method on ultrasound ❏ Macrocalcifications Greater than or equal to 0.5 mm in size ❏ Microcalcifications out of mass Echogenic foci that do not occupy the entire acoustic beam and do not shadow. Less than 0.5 mm in diameter ❏ Microcalcifications in mass Embedded in a mass, microcalcifications are well depicted. The punctate, hyperechoic foci will be conspicuous in a hypoechoic mass BIRADS on Ultrasound has following categories ❏ Category 0 – Incomplete Additional imaging evaluation needed before final assessment Final Assessment ❏ Category 1 – Negative No lesion found (routine follow-up) ❏ Category 2 –Benign finding No malignant features; e.g. cyst (routine follow-up for age, clinical management) ❏ Category 3 – Probably benign finding Malignancy is highly unlikely, e.g. fibroadenoma (initial short interval followup) ❏ Category 4 – Suspicious abnormality Low to moderate probability of cancer, biopsy should be considered ❏ Category 5 – Highly suggestive of Almost certainly cancer, appropriate action should be taken malignancy ❏ Category 6 – Known cancer Biopsy proven malignancy, prior to institution of therapy Your situation is likely that of BIRADS category 2 but some radiologists want to completely rule out category 3. Hope this helps.