PURPOSE: Breast cancer-detecting ability of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) was investigated by comparing the breast cancer detection rates of DW-MRI and mammography (MMG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects were 48 women who had breast cancer (53 cancer lesions) who underwent DW-MRI before surgery. Altogether, 41 lesions were invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), 7 were noninvasive ductal carcinoma (NIDC) and 5 were "others." RESULTS: The breast cancer detection rates by MMG and DW-MRI were 84.9% and 94.3% (P < 0.001), respectively. In each classification of histology and size, the detection rate by DW-MRI was higher than that by MMG. In relation to the mammary gland density, the detection rates of fatty, scattered, heterogeneously dense, and extremely dense mammary glands were 100%, 100%, 92.0%, and 83.3%, respectively. The mean apparent diffusion coefficient values of the histologic types were 1.07 +/- 0.17 x 10(-3), 1.50 +/- 0.24 x 10(-3), 1.12 +/- 0.25 x 10(-3), and 2.01 +/- 0.29 x 10(-3) mm(2)/s for IDC, NIDC, others, and normal breast, respectively, showing that the values of IDC and NIDC were significantly different from that of the normal breast (P < 0.001 each). A significant difference was also noted between IDC and NIDC (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: DW-MRI may be useful for detecting breast cancer in a wide age group of women, including young women with dense mammary glands.
PURPOSE: Breast cancer-detecting ability of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) was investigated by comparing the breast cancer detection rates of DW-MRI and mammography (MMG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects were 48 women who had breast cancer (53 cancer lesions) who underwent DW-MRI before surgery. Altogether, 41 lesions were invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), 7 were noninvasive ductal carcinoma (NIDC) and 5 were "others." RESULTS: The breast cancer detection rates by MMG and DW-MRI were 84.9% and 94.3% (P < 0.001), respectively. In each classification of histology and size, the detection rate by DW-MRI was higher than that by MMG. In relation to the mammary gland density, the detection rates of fatty, scattered, heterogeneously dense, and extremely dense mammary glands were 100%, 100%, 92.0%, and 83.3%, respectively. The mean apparent diffusion coefficient values of the histologic types were 1.07 +/- 0.17 x 10(-3), 1.50 +/- 0.24 x 10(-3), 1.12 +/- 0.25 x 10(-3), and 2.01 +/- 0.29 x 10(-3) mm(2)/s for IDC, NIDC, others, and normal breast, respectively, showing that the values of IDC and NIDC were significantly different from that of the normal breast (P < 0.001 each). A significant difference was also noted between IDC and NIDC (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: DW-MRI may be useful for detecting breast cancer in a wide age group of women, including young women with dense mammary glands.
Authors: S Shapiro; E A Coleman; M Broeders; M Codd; H de Koning; J Fracheboud; S Moss; E Paci; S Stachenko; R Ballard-Barbash Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Kaoru Itakura; Juan Lessing; Theadora Sakata; Amy Heinzerling; Eline Vriens; Dorota Wisner; Michael Alvarado; Laura Esserman; Cheryl Ewing; Nola Hylton; E Shelley Hwang Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Habib Rahbar; Savannah C Partridge; Peter R Eby; Wendy B Demartini; Robert L Gutierrez; Sue Peacock; Constance D Lehman Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jacob E D Levman; Cristina Gallego-Ortiz; Ellen Warner; Petrina Causer; Anne L Martel Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: Savannah C Partridge; Lisa Singer; Ryan Sun; Lisa J Wilmes; Catherine S Klifa; Constance D Lehman; Nola M Hylton Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-09-14 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: G Sonmez; F Cuce; H Mutlu; M Incedayi; E Ozturk; O Sildiroglu; M Velioglu; C C Bashekim; E Kizilkaya Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2011-09-18 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Till-Alexander Heusner; Sherko Kuemmel; Angela Koeninger; Monia E Hamami; Steffen Hahn; Anton Quinsten; Andreas Bockisch; Michael Forsting; Thomas Lauenstein; Gerald Antoch; Alexander Stahl Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 9.236