Literature DB >> 21420333

Can signal enhancement ratio (SER) reduce the number of recommended biopsies without affecting cancer yield in occult MRI-detected lesions?

Vignesh A Arasu1, Ryan C-Y Chen, David N Newitt, C Belinda Chang, Hilda Tso, Nola M Hylton, Bonnie N Joe.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: We retrospectively determined if signal enhancement ratio (SER), a quantitative measure of contrast kinetics using volumetric parameters, could reduce the number of biopsy recommendations without decreasing the number of cancers detected when applied to suspicious lesions seen on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) 4 or 5 lesions seen on breast MRI in 2008 that were clinically and mammographically occult yielded a final sample size of 73 lesions in 65 patients. Images were processed with in-house software. Parameters used to predict benignity/malignancy included SER total tumor volume (lesion volume above a 70% initial enhancement level), SER partial tumor volume (volume with "washout" and "plateau" kinetics), SER washout tumor volume, peak SER, and peak percent enhancement. Thresholds were determined to retrospectively discriminate benign from malignant histopathology. Clinical impact was assessed through the reduction in the number of biopsies recommended (by eliminating benign lesions discriminated by SER).
RESULTS: Based on the original radiologist interpretations, 73 occult lesions were called suspicious and biopsied with a predictive value of biopsies (PPV(3)) of 18/73 (25%). SER parameters were found to be significantly associated with histopathology (P < .05). Biopsy recommendations could be reduced using SER parameters of SER partial tumor volume (73 to 40), SER total tumor volume (73 to 45), and peak percent enhancement (73 to 55) without removing true positives.
CONCLUSION: The adjunctive use of SER parameters may reduce the number of recommended biopsies without reducing the number of cancers detected.
Copyright © 2011 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21420333      PMCID: PMC4506794          DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2011.02.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  23 in total

1.  Assessing heterogeneity of lesion enhancement kinetics in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  A Karahaliou; K Vassiou; N S Arikidis; S Skiadopoulos; T Kanavou; L Costaridou
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Fundamentals of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Michael J Paldino; Daniel P Barboriak
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.266

3.  MRI-detected suspicious breast lesions: predictive values of kinetic features measured by computer-aided evaluation.

Authors:  Lilian C Wang; Wendy B DeMartini; Savannah C Partridge; Sue Peacock; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 4.  Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging.

Authors:  P S Tofts
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1997 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 5.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as an imaging biomarker.

Authors:  Nola Hylton
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-07-10       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Assess Tumor Histopathology and Angiogenesis in Breast Carcinoma.

Authors:  Laura Esserman; Nola Hylton; Tracy George; Noel Weidner
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 2.431

7.  Effect of the enhancement threshold on the computer-aided detection of breast cancer using MRI.

Authors:  Jacob E D Levman; Petrina Causer; Ellen Warner; Anne L Martel
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 8.  Pre-operative staging of breast cancer with breast MRI: one step forward, two steps back?

Authors:  C Kuhl; W Kuhn; M Braun; H Schild
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2007-10-23       Impact factor: 4.380

9.  Kinetic curves of malignant lesions are not consistent across MRI systems: need for improved standardization of breast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI acquisition.

Authors:  Sanaz A Jansen; Akiko Shimauchi; Lindsay Zak; Xiaobing Fan; Abbie M Wood; Gregory S Karczmar; Gillian M Newstead
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer.

Authors:  Constance D Lehman; Constantine Gatsonis; Christiane K Kuhl; R Edward Hendrick; Etta D Pisano; Lucy Hanna; Sue Peacock; Stanley F Smazal; Daniel D Maki; Thomas B Julian; Elizabeth R DePeri; David A Bluemke; Mitchell D Schnall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-03-28       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  13 in total

1.  Association of distant recurrence-free survival with algorithmically extracted MRI characteristics in breast cancer.

Authors:  Maciej A Mazurowski; Ashirbani Saha; Michael R Harowicz; Elizabeth Hope Cain; Jeffrey R Marks; P Kelly Marcom
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-01-22       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  A study of association of Oncotype DX recurrence score with DCE-MRI characteristics using multivariate machine learning models.

Authors:  Ashirbani Saha; Michael R Harowicz; Weiyao Wang; Maciej A Mazurowski
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-02-09       Impact factor: 4.553

3.  Distinguishing benign and malignant breast tumors: preliminary comparison of kinetic modeling approaches using multi-institutional dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI data from the International Breast MR Consortium 6883 trial.

Authors:  Anna G Sorace; Savannah C Partridge; Xia Li; Jack Virostko; Stephanie L Barnes; Daniel S Hippe; Wei Huang; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-01-22

4.  Current and emerging quantitative magnetic resonance imaging methods for assessing and predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant therapy.

Authors:  Richard G Abramson; Lori R Arlinghaus; Jared A Weis; Xia Li; Adrienne N Dula; Eduard Y Chekmenev; Seth A Smith; Michael I Miga; Vandana G Abramson; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)       Date:  2012-10

5.  DCE-MRI analysis methods for predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: pilot study findings.

Authors:  Xia Li; Lori R Arlinghaus; Gregory D Ayers; A Bapsi Chakravarthy; Richard G Abramson; Vandana G Abramson; Nkiruka Atuegwu; Jaime Farley; Ingrid A Mayer; Mark C Kelley; Ingrid M Meszoely; Julie Means-Powell; Ana M Grau; Melinda Sanders; Sandeep R Bhave; Thomas E Yankeelov
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2013-05-09       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Cortical bone vessel identification and quantification on contrast-enhanced MR images.

Authors:  Po-Hung Wu; Matthew Gibbons; Sarah C Foreman; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Misung Han; Roland Krug; Jing Liu; Thomas M Link; Galateia J Kazakia
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2019-06

7.  Effects of MRI scanner parameters on breast cancer radiomics.

Authors:  Ashirbani Saha; Xiaozhi Yu; Dushyant Sahoo; Maciej A Mazurowski
Journal:  Expert Syst Appl       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 6.954

8.  Computer-aided detection (CAD) system for breast MRI in assessment of local tumor extent, nodal status, and multifocality of invasive breast cancers: preliminary study.

Authors:  Sung Eun Song; Bo Kyoung Seo; Kyu Ran Cho; Ok Hee Woo; Gil Soo Son; Chulhan Kim; Sung Bum Cho; Soon-Sun Kwon
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2015-02-08       Impact factor: 3.909

9.  Semi-quantitative parameter analysis of DCE-MRI revisited: monte-carlo simulation, clinical comparisons, and clinical validation of measurement errors in patients with type 2 neurofibromatosis.

Authors:  Alan Jackson; Ka-Loh Li; Xiaoping Zhu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  US-localized diffuse optical tomography in breast cancer: comparison with pharmacokinetic parameters of DCE-MRI and with pathologic biomarkers.

Authors:  Min Jung Kim; Min-Ying Su; Hon J Yu; Jeon-Hor Chen; Eun-Kyung Kim; Hee Jung Moon; Ji Soo Choi
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.