OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the predictive features of BI-RADS lesion characteristics and the risk of malignancy for mammographically and clinically occult lesions detected initially on breast MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 1,523 consecutive breast MRI examinations performed from January 1, 2003, to June 30, 2005, to identify all lesions initially detected on MRI and assessed as BI-RADS 4 or 5 for which the patient underwent subsequent imaging-guided needle or excisional biopsy. BI-RADS lesion features were recorded for each case, and the risk of malignancy was assessed using generalized estimating equations. Separate multivariate models were constructed for lesions classified as masses. RESULTS: Included in the analysis were 258 suspicious lesions in 196 women. Among all lesions, those of 1 cm or greater were significantly more often malignant (50/147, 34%) than lesions of less than 1 cm (22/111, 20%; odds ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.13-3.83). For masses, size, BI-RADS margin, and enhancement pattern predicted malignancy. In multivariate analysis of combinations of features, masses of 1 cm or greater with heterogeneous enhancement and irregular margins had a 68% probability of malignancy. Masses of 1 cm or greater with smooth margins and homogeneous enhancement had the lowest predicted probability of malignancy of 3%. BI-RADS descriptors and size were not significant predictors of malignancy for nonmasslike enhancement (NMLE). CONCLUSION: Combinations of BI-RADS lesion descriptors can predict the probability of malignancy for breast MRI masses but not for NMLE. If our model is validated, masses with a low probability of malignancy may be eligible for short-interval follow-up rather than biopsy. Further research focused on predictive features of NMLE is needed.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the predictive features of BI-RADS lesion characteristics and the risk of malignancy for mammographically and clinically occult lesions detected initially on breast MRI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 1,523 consecutive breast MRI examinations performed from January 1, 2003, to June 30, 2005, to identify all lesions initially detected on MRI and assessed as BI-RADS 4 or 5 for which the patient underwent subsequent imaging-guided needle or excisional biopsy. BI-RADS lesion features were recorded for each case, and the risk of malignancy was assessed using generalized estimating equations. Separate multivariate models were constructed for lesions classified as masses. RESULTS: Included in the analysis were 258 suspicious lesions in 196 women. Among all lesions, those of 1 cm or greater were significantly more often malignant (50/147, 34%) than lesions of less than 1 cm (22/111, 20%; odds ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.13-3.83). For masses, size, BI-RADS margin, and enhancement pattern predicted malignancy. In multivariate analysis of combinations of features, masses of 1 cm or greater with heterogeneous enhancement and irregular margins had a 68% probability of malignancy. Masses of 1 cm or greater with smooth margins and homogeneous enhancement had the lowest predicted probability of malignancy of 3%. BI-RADS descriptors and size were not significant predictors of malignancy for nonmasslike enhancement (NMLE). CONCLUSION: Combinations of BI-RADS lesion descriptors can predict the probability of malignancy for breast MRI masses but not for NMLE. If our model is validated, masses with a low probability of malignancy may be eligible for short-interval follow-up rather than biopsy. Further research focused on predictive features of NMLE is needed.
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
Authors: Maria Adele Marino; Paola Clauser; Ramona Woitek; Georg J Wengert; Panagiotis Kapetas; Maria Bernathova; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Thomas H Helbich; Klaus Preidler; Pascal A T Baltzer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Daniel I Golden; Jafi A Lipson; Melinda L Telli; James M Ford; Daniel L Rubin Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: K Pinker; W Bogner; P Baltzer; S Trattnig; S Gruber; O Abeyakoon; M Bernathova; O Zaric; P Dubsky; Z Bago-Horvath; M Weber; D Leithner; T H Helbich Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-12-05 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Christoph I Lee; Laura Ichikawa; Michele C Rochelle; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana L Miglioretti; Brian L Sprague; Wendy B DeMartini; Karen J Wernli; Bonnie N Joe; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Constance D Lehman Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 3.173