OBJECTIVES: To explore how apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) in malignant breast lesions are affected by selection of b values in the monoexponential model and to compare ADCs with diffusion coefficients (Ds) obtained from the biexponential model. METHODS: Twenty-four women (mean age 51.3 years) with locally advanced breast cancer were included in this study. Pre-treatment diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging was performed using a 1.5-T system with b values of 0, 50, 100, 250 and 800 s/mm(2). Thirteen different b value combinations were used to derive individual monoexponential ADC maps. All b values were used in the biexponential model. RESULTS: Median ADC (including all b values) and D were 1.04 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s (range 0.82-1.61 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and 0.84 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s (range 0.17-1.56 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), respectively. There was a strong positive correlation between ADCs and Ds. For clinically relevant b value combinations, maximum deviation between ADCs including and excluding low b values (<100 s/mm(2)) was 11.8 %. CONCLUSION: Selection of b values strongly affects ADCs of malignant breast lesions. However, by excluding low b values, ADCs approach biexponential Ds, demonstrating that microperfusion influences the diffusion signal. Thus, care should be taken when ADC calculation includes low b values.
OBJECTIVES: To explore how apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) in malignant breast lesions are affected by selection of b values in the monoexponential model and to compare ADCs with diffusion coefficients (Ds) obtained from the biexponential model. METHODS: Twenty-four women (mean age 51.3 years) with locally advanced breast cancer were included in this study. Pre-treatment diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging was performed using a 1.5-T system with b values of 0, 50, 100, 250 and 800 s/mm(2). Thirteen different b value combinations were used to derive individual monoexponential ADC maps. All b values were used in the biexponential model. RESULTS: Median ADC (including all b values) and D were 1.04 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s (range 0.82-1.61 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and 0.84 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s (range 0.17-1.56 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), respectively. There was a strong positive correlation between ADCs and Ds. For clinically relevant b value combinations, maximum deviation between ADCs including and excluding low b values (<100 s/mm(2)) was 11.8 %. CONCLUSION: Selection of b values strongly affects ADCs of malignant breast lesions. However, by excluding low b values, ADCs approach biexponential Ds, demonstrating that microperfusion influences the diffusion signal. Thus, care should be taken when ADC calculation includes low b values.
Authors: Nicky H G M Peters; Koen L Vincken; Maurice A A J van den Bosch; Peter R Luijten; Willem P Th M Mali; Lambertus W Bartels Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Thomas E Yankeelov; Martin Lepage; Anuradha Chakravarthy; Elizabeth E Broome; Kenneth J Niermann; Mark C Kelley; Ingrid Meszoely; Ingrid A Mayer; Cheryl R Herman; Kevin McManus; Ronald R Price; John C Gore Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-11-21 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: E E Sigmund; G Y Cho; S Kim; M Finn; M Moccaldi; J H Jensen; D K Sodickson; J D Goldberg; S Formenti; L Moy Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-02-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Riham H Ei Khouli; Michael A Jacobs; Sarah D Mezban; Peng Huang; Ihab R Kamel; Katarzyna J Macura; David A Bluemke Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: S C Partridge; H Rahbar; R Murthy; X Chai; B F Kurland; W B DeMartini; C D Lehman Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-01-19 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: A Fangberget; L B Nilsen; K H Hole; M M Holmen; O Engebraaten; B Naume; H-J Smith; D R Olsen; T Seierstad Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Y Ueno; S Takahashi; Y Ohno; K Kitajima; M Yui; Y Kassai; F Kawakami; H Miyake; K Sugimura Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: P Mürtz; M Tsesarskiy; A Kowal; F Träber; J Gieseke; W A Willinek; C C Leutner; A Schmiedel; H H Schild Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-06-05 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Gene Young Cho; Linda Moy; Sungheon G Kim; Steven H Baete; Melanie Moccaldi; James S Babb; Daniel K Sodickson; Eric E Sigmund Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-11-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Xiaobing Fan; Kay Macleod; Devkumar Mustafi; Suzanne D Conzen; Erica Markiewicz; Marta Zamora; James Vosicky; Jeffrey Mueller; Gregory S Karczmar Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-07-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Colleen Bailey; Bernard Siow; Eleftheria Panagiotaki; John H Hipwell; Thomy Mertzanidou; Julie Owen; Patrycja Gazinska; Sarah E Pinder; Daniel C Alexander; David J Hawkes Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 4.044