Literature DB >> 25714323

Background parenchymal uptake during molecular breast imaging and associated clinical factors.

Carrie B Hruska1, Deborah J Rhodes, Amy Lynn Conners, Katie N Jones, Rickey E Carter, Ravi K Lingineni, Celine M Vachon.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purposes of this study were to describe the prevalence of background parenchymal uptake categories observed at screening molecular breast imaging (MBI) and to examine the association of background parenchymal uptake with mammographic density and other clinical factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Adjunct MBI screening was performed for women with dense breasts on previous mammograms. Two radiologists reviewed images from the MBI examinations and subjectively categorized background parenchymal uptake into four groups: photopenic, minimal-mild, moderate, or marked. Women with breast implants or a personal history of breast cancer were excluded. The association between background parenchymal uptake categories and patient characteristics was examined with Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests as appropriate. RESULTS. In 1149 eligible participants, background parenchymal uptake was photopenic in 252 (22%), minimal-mild in 728 (63%), and moderate or marked in 169 (15%). The distribution of categories differed across BI-RADS density categories (p < 0.0001). In 164 participants with extremely dense breasts, background parenchymal uptake was photopenic in 72 (44%), minimal-mild in 55 (34%), and moderate or marked in 37 (22%). The moderate-marked group was younger on average, more likely to be premenopausal or perimenopausal, and more likely to be using postmenopausal hormone therapy than the photopenic or minimal-mild groups (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION. Among women with similar-appearing mammographic density, background parenchymal uptake ranged from photopenic to marked. Background parenchymal uptake was associated with menopausal status and postmenopausal hormone therapy but not with premenopausal hormonal contraceptives, phase of menstrual cycle, or Gail model 5-year risk of breast cancer. Additional work is necessary to fully characterize the underlying cause of background parenchymal uptake and determine its utility in predicting subsequent risk of breast cancer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MRI; breast density; hormone therapy; menstrual cycle; molecular breast imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25714323      PMCID: PMC4423612          DOI: 10.2214/AJR.14.12979

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  40 in total

1.  Contrast enhancement kinetics of normal breast parenchyma in dynamic MR mammography: effects of menopausal status, oral contraceptives, and postmenopausal hormone therapy.

Authors:  Katrin Hegenscheid; Carsten O Schmidt; Rebecca Seipel; René Laqua; Ralf Ohlinger; Norbert Hosten; Ralf Puls
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-07-08       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  A novel automated mammographic density measure and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  John J Heine; Christopher G Scott; Thomas A Sellers; Kathleen R Brandt; Daniel J Serie; Fang-Fang Wu; Marilyn J Morton; Beth A Schueler; Fergus J Couch; Janet E Olson; V Shane Pankratz; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Impact of menopausal status on background parenchymal enhancement and fibroglandular tissue on breast MRI.

Authors:  Valencia King; Yajia Gu; Jennifer B Kaplan; Jennifer D Brooks; Malcolm C Pike; Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-07-04       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice.

Authors:  Christiane Kuhl
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Background ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in positron emission mammography (PEM): correlation with mammographic density and background parenchymal enhancement in breast MRI.

Authors:  Hye Ryoung Koo; Woo Kyung Moon; In Kook Chun; Jae Seon Eo; Joseph Xavier Jeyanth; Jung Min Chang; Nariya Cho; Keon Wook Kang
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.528

6.  Does MRI breast "density" (degree of background enhancement) correlate with mammographic breast density?

Authors:  Nienke L Hansen; Christiane K Kuhl; Alexandra Barabasch; Kevin Strobel; Simone Schrading
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2014-01-21       Impact factor: 4.813

7.  Journal club: molecular breast imaging at reduced radiation dose for supplemental screening in mammographically dense breasts.

Authors:  Deborah J Rhodes; Carrie B Hruska; Amy Lynn Conners; Cindy L Tortorelli; Robert W Maxwell; Katie N Jones; Alicia Y Toledano; Michael K O'Connor
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Background uptake of breast-specific gamma imaging: correlation with mammographic breast density and background enhancement of breast MRI.

Authors:  Mi Young Kim; Nami Choi; Sung Min Ko; Hyun Woo Chung
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 1.605

9.  Gamma camera breast imaging lexicon.

Authors:  Amy Lynn Conners; Robert W Maxwell; Cindy L Tortorelli; Carrie B Hruska; Deborah J Rhodes; Judy C Boughey; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Mammographic density and risk of breast cancer by age and tumor characteristics.

Authors:  Kimberly A Bertrand; Rulla M Tamimi; Christopher G Scott; Matthew R Jensen; V Pankratz; Daniel Visscher; Aaron Norman; Fergus Couch; John Shepherd; Bo Fan; Yunn-Yi Chen; Lin Ma; Andrew H Beck; Steven R Cummings; Karla Kerlikowske; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 8.408

View more
  9 in total

1.  Classification of Background Parenchymal Uptake on Molecular Breast Imaging Using a Convolutional Neural Network.

Authors:  Rickey E Carter; Zachi I Attia; Jennifer R Geske; Amy Lynn Conners; Dana H Whaley; Katie N Hunt; Michael K O'Connor; Deborah J Rhodes; Carrie B Hruska
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2019-02

2.  Current and Future Methods for Measuring Breast Density: A Brief Comparative Review.

Authors:  Mark A Sak; Peter J Littrup; Neb Duric; Maeve Mullooly; Mark E Sherman; Gretchen L Gierach
Journal:  Breast Cancer Manag       Date:  2015-08-28

3.  Effect of menstrual cycle phase on background parenchymal uptake at molecular breast imaging.

Authors:  Carrie B Hruska; Amy Lynn Conners; Celine M Vachon; Michael K O'Connor; Lynne T Shuster; Adam C Bartley; Deborah J Rhodes
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-06-22       Impact factor: 3.173

4.  The Dose-Response Effects of Aerobic Exercise on Body Composition and Breast Tissue among Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Justin C Brown; Despina Kontos; Mitchell D Schnall; Shandong Wu; Kathryn H Schmitz
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2016-04-20

Review 5.  Dedicated Breast Gamma Camera Imaging and Breast PET: Current Status and Future Directions.

Authors:  Deepa Narayanan; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2018-07

6.  Quantitative background parenchymal uptake on molecular breast imaging and breast cancer risk: a case-control study.

Authors:  Carrie B Hruska; Jennifer R Geske; Tiffinee N Swanson; Alyssa N Mammel; David S Lake; Armando Manduca; Amy Lynn Conners; Dana H Whaley; Christopher G Scott; Rickey E Carter; Deborah J Rhodes; Michael K O'Connor; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 6.466

7.  Impact of short-term low-dose tamoxifen on molecular breast imaging background parenchymal uptake: a pilot study.

Authors:  Carrie B Hruska; Katie N Hunt; Amy Lynn Conners; Jennifer R Geske; Kathleen R Brandt; Amy C Degnim; Celine M Vachon; Michael K O'Connor; Deborah J Rhodes
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 6.466

8.  Sex Differences Research, Precision Medicine, and the Future of Women's Health.

Authors:  Virginia M Miller; Walter A Rocca; Stephanie S Faubion
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2015-09-01       Impact factor: 2.681

9.  Background parenchymal uptake on molecular breast imaging as a breast cancer risk factor: a case-control study.

Authors:  Carrie B Hruska; Christopher G Scott; Amy Lynn Conners; Dana H Whaley; Deborah J Rhodes; Rickey E Carter; Michael K O'Connor; Katie N Hunt; Kathleen R Brandt; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 6.466

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.