Literature DB >> 25698353

Evaluation of Kinetic Entropy of Breast Masses Initially Found on MRI using Whole-lesion Curve Distribution Data: Comparison with the Standard Kinetic Analysis.

Akiko Shimauchi1, Hiroyuki Abe, David V Schacht, Jian Yulei, Federico D Pineda, Sanaz A Jansen, Rajiv Ganesh, Gillian M Newstead.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To quantify kinetic heterogeneity of breast masses that were initially detected with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, using whole-lesion kinetic distribution data obtained from computer-aided evaluation (CAE), and to compare that with standard kinetic curve analysis.
METHODS: Clinical MR images from 2006 to 2011 with breast masses initially detected with MRI were evaluated with CAE. The relative frequencies of six kinetic patterns (medium-persistent, medium-plateau, medium-washout, rapid-persistent, rapid-plateau, rapid-washout) within the entire lesion were used to calculate kinetic entropy (KE), a quantitative measure of enhancement pattern heterogeneity. Initial uptake (IU) and signal enhancement ratio (SER) were obtained from the most-suspicious kinetic curve. Mann-Whitney U test and ROC analysis were conducted for differentiation of malignant and benign masses.
RESULTS: Forty benign and 37 malignant masses comprised the case set. IU and SER were not significantly different between malignant and benign masses, whereas KE was significantly greater for malignant than benign masses (p = 0.748, p = 0.083, and p < 0.0001, respectively). Areas under ROC curve for IU, SER, and KE were 0.479, 0.615, and 0.662, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Quantification of kinetic heterogeneity of whole-lesion time-curve data with KE has the potential to improve differentiation of malignant from benign breast masses on breast MRI. KEY POINTS: • Kinetic heterogeneity can be quantified by computer-aided evaluation of breast MRI • Kinetic entropy was greater in malignant masses than benign masses • Kinetic entropy has the potential to improve differentiation of breast masses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25698353     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3635-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  43 in total

1.  Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions?

Authors:  C K Kuhl; P Mielcareck; S Klaschik; C Leutner; E Wardelmann; J Gieseke; H H Schild
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Breast MR imaging in women at increased lifetime risk of breast cancer: clinical system for computerized assessment of breast lesions initial results.

Authors:  Kenneth G A Gilhuijs; Eline E Deurloo; Sara H Muller; Johannes L Peterse; Leo J Schultze Kool
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Measures of angular spread and entropy for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms.

Authors:  Shantanu Banik; Rangaraj M Rangayyan; J E Leo Desautels
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 2.924

4.  Sensitivity and specificity of unenhanced MR mammography (DWI combined with T2-weighted TSE imaging, ueMRM) for the differentiation of mass lesions.

Authors:  Pascal A T Baltzer; Matthias Benndorf; Matthias Dietzel; Mieczyslaw Gajda; Oumar Camara; Werner A Kaiser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Computer-aided diagnosis in breast DCE-MRI--quantification of the heterogeneity of breast lesions.

Authors:  Uta Preim; Sylvia Glaßer; Bernhard Preim; Frank Fischbach; Jens Ricke
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 3.528

6.  Observer variability in the interpretation of contrast enhanced MRI of the breast.

Authors:  S Mussurakis; D L Buckley; A M Coady; L W Turnbull; A Horsman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Comparing performance of the CADstream and the DynaCAD breast MRI CAD systems : CADstream vs. DynaCAD in breast MRI.

Authors:  Joann Pan; Basak E Dogan; Selin Carkaci; Lumarie Santiago; Elsa Arribas; Scott B Cantor; Wei Wei; R Jason Stafford; Gary J Whitman
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 4.056

8.  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

9.  Accuracy and interpretation time of computer-aided detection among novice and experienced breast MRI readers.

Authors:  Constance D Lehman; Jeffrey D Blume; Wendy B DeMartini; Nola M Hylton; Benjamin Herman; Mitchell D Schnall
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesion.

Authors:  C Marini; C Iacconi; M Giannelli; A Cilotti; M Moretti; C Bartolozzi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-03-14       Impact factor: 7.034

View more
  5 in total

1.  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

2.  Differentiation between subcentimeter carcinomas and benign lesions using kinetic parameters derived from ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI.

Authors:  Natsuko Onishi; Meredith Sadinski; Peter Gibbs; Katherine M Gallagher; Mary C Hughes; Eun Sook Ko; Brittany Z Dashevsky; Dattesh D Shanbhag; Maggie M Fung; Theodore M Hunt; Danny F Martinez; Amita Shukla-Dave; Elizabeth A Morris; Elizabeth J Sutton
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-08-29       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Can the delayed phase of quantitative contrast-enhanced mammography improve the diagnostic performance on breast masses?

Authors:  Weimin Xu; Bowen Zheng; Weiguo Chen; Chanjuan Wen; Hui Zeng; Zilong He; Genggeng Qin; Yingjia Li
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-08

4.  Kinetic Curve Type Assessment for Classification of Breast Lesions Using Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging.

Authors:  Shih-Neng Yang; Fang-Jing Li; Jun-Ming Chen; Geoffrey Zhang; Yen-Hsiu Liao; Tzung-Chi Huang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Correlation Between Enhancement Intensity in Contrast Enhancement Spectral Mammography and Types of Kinetic Curves in Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Wojciech Rudnicki; Sylwia Heinze; Tomasz Piegza; Marta Pawlak; Zbigniew Kojs; Elżbieta Łuczyńska
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2020-03-04
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.