Literature DB >> 15585733

Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy.

David A Bluemke1, Constantine A Gatsonis, Mei Hsiu Chen, Gia A DeAngelis, Nanette DeBruhl, Steven Harms, Sylvia H Heywang-Köbrunner, Nola Hylton, Christiane K Kuhl, Constance Lehman, Etta D Pisano, Petrina Causer, Stuart J Schnitt, Stanley F Smazal, Carol B Stelling, Paul T Weatherall, Mitchell D Schnall.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been shown to have high sensitivity for cancer detection and is increasingly used following mammography to evaluate suspicious breast lesions.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of breast MRI in conjunction with mammography for the detection of breast cancer in patients with suspicious mammographic or clinical findings. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective multicenter investigation of the International Breast MR Consortium conducted at 14 university hospitals in North America and Europe from June 2, 1998, through October 31, 2001, of 821 patients referred for breast biopsy for American College of Radiology category 4 or 5 mammographic assessment or suspicious clinical or ultrasound finding.
INTERVENTIONS: MRI examinations performed prior to breast biopsy; MRI results were interpreted at each site, which were blinded to pathological results. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of breast MRI.
RESULTS: Among the 821 patients, there were 404 malignant index lesions, of which 63 were ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 341 were invasive carcinoma. Of the 417 nonmalignant index lesions, 366 were benign, 47 showed atypical histology, and 4 were lobular carcinoma in situ. The AUC pooled over all institutions was 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-0.91). MRI correctly detected cancer in 356 of 404 cancer cases (DCIS or invasive cancer), resulting in a sensitivity of 88.1% (95% CI, 84.6%-91.1%), and correctly identified as negative for cancer 281 of 417 cases without cancer, resulting in a specificity of 67.7% (95% CI, 62.7%-71.9%). MRI performance was not significantly affected by mammographic breast density, tumor histology, or menopausal status. The positive predictive values for 356 of 492 patients was 72.4% (95% CI, 68.2%-76.3%) and of mammography for 367 of 695 patients was 52.8% (95% CI, 49.0%-56.6%) (P<.005). Dynamic MRI did not improve the AUC compared with 3-dimensional MRI alone, but the specificity of a washout pattern for 123 of 136 patients without cancer was 90.4% (95% CI, 84%-95%).
CONCLUSIONS: Breast MRI has high sensitivity but only moderate specificity independent of breast density, tumor type, and menopausal status. Although the positive predictive value of MRI is greater than mammography, MRI does not obviate the need for subsequent tissue sampling in this setting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15585733     DOI: 10.1001/jama.292.22.2735

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  129 in total

1.  The added value of quantitative multi-voxel MR spectroscopy in breast magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  M D Dorrius; R M Pijnappel; M C van der Weide Jansen; L Jansen; P Kappert; M Oudkerk; P E Sijens
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Non-contrast enhanced MRI for evaluation of breast lesions: comparison of non-contrast enhanced high spectral and spatial resolution (HiSS) images versus contrast enhanced fat-suppressed images.

Authors:  Milica Medved; Xiaobing Fan; Hiroyuki Abe; Gillian M Newstead; Abbie M Wood; Akiko Shimauchi; Kirti Kulkarni; Marko K Ivancevic; Lorenzo L Pesce; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Gregory S Karczmar
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Kinetic analysis of lesions without mass effect on breast MRI using manual and computer-assisted methods.

Authors:  Tibor Vag; Pascal A T Baltzer; Matthias Dietzel; Ramy Zoubi; Mieczyslaw Gajda; Oumar Camara; Werner A Kaiser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in focal breast lesions: analysis of 78 cases with pathological correlation.

Authors:  F Fornasa; L Pinali; A Gasparini; E Toniolli; S Montemezzi
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Characterizing accuracy of total hemoglobin recovery using contrast-detail analysis in 3D image-guided near infrared spectroscopy with the boundary element method.

Authors:  Hamid R Ghadyani; Subhadra Srinivasan; Brian W Pogue; Keith D Paulsen
Journal:  Opt Express       Date:  2010-07-19       Impact factor: 3.894

6.  Computer-Aided Diagnosis Scheme for Distinguishing Between Benign and Malignant Masses in Breast DCE-MRI.

Authors:  Emi Honda; Ryohei Nakayama; Hitoshi Koyama; Akiyoshi Yamashita
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Direct Regularization From Co-Registered Contrast MRI Improves Image Quality of MRI-Guided Near-Infrared Spectral Tomography of Breast Lesions.

Authors:  Limin Zhang; Shudong Jiang; Yan Zhao; Jinchao Feng; Brian W Pogue; Keith D Paulsen
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 10.048

8.  Gd-labeled glycol chitosan as a pH-responsive magnetic resonance imaging agent for detecting acidic tumor microenvironments.

Authors:  Kido Nwe; Ching-Hui Huang; Andrew Tsourkas
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 7.446

9.  Methodology development for three-dimensional MR-guided near infrared spectroscopy of breast tumors.

Authors:  Colin M Carpenter; Subhadra Srinivasan; Brian W Pogue; Keith D Paulsen
Journal:  Opt Express       Date:  2008-10-27       Impact factor: 3.894

10.  Morphologic blooming in breast MRI as a characterization of margin for discriminating benign from malignant lesions.

Authors:  Alan Penn; Scott Thompson; Rachel Brem; Constance Lehman; Paul Weatherall; Mitchell Schnall; Gillian Newstead; Emily Conant; Susan Ascher; Elizabeth Morris; Etta Pisano
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.173

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.