Literature DB >> 25938679

Breast Cancer: Diffusion Kurtosis MR Imaging-Diagnostic Accuracy and Correlation with Clinical-Pathologic Factors.

Kun Sun1, Xiaosong Chen1, Weimin Chai1, Xiaochun Fei1, Caixia Fu1, Xu Yan1, Ying Zhan1, Kemin Chen1, Kunwei Shen1, Fuhua Yan1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess diagnostic accuracy with diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) in patients with breast lesions and to evaluate the potential association between DKI-derived parameters and breast cancer clinical-pathologic factors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained. Data from 97 patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 45.7 years ± 13.1; range, 19-70 years) with 98 lesions (57 malignant and 41 benign) who were treated between January 2014 and April 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. DKI (with b values of 0-2800 sec/mm(2)) and conventional diffusion-weighted imaging data were acquired. Kurtosis and diffusion coefficients from DKI and apparent diffusion coefficients from diffusion-weighted imaging were measured by two radiologists. Student t test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Jonckheere-Terpstra test, receiver operating characteristic curves, and Spearman correlation were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Kurtosis coefficients were significantly higher in the malignant lesions than in the benign lesions (1.05 ± 0.22 vs 0.65 ± 0.11, respectively; P < .0001). Diffusivity and apparent diffusion coefficients in the malignant lesions were significantly lower than those in the benign lesions (1.13 ± 0.27 vs 1.97 ± 0.33 and 1.02 ± 0.18 vs 1.48 ± 0.33, respectively; P < .0001). Significantly higher specificity for differentiation of malignant from benign lesions was shown with the use of kurtosis and diffusivity coefficients than with the use of apparent diffusion coefficients (83% [34 of 41] and 83% [34 of 41] vs 76% [31 of 41], respectively; P < .0001) with equal sensitivity (95% [54 of 57]). In patients with invasive breast cancer, kurtosis was positively correlated with tumor histologic grade (r = 0.75) and expression of the Ki-67 protein (r = 0.55). Diffusivity was negatively correlated with tumor histologic grades (r = -0.44) and Ki-67 expression (r = -0.46).
CONCLUSION: DKI showed higher specificity than did conventional diffusion-weighted imaging for assessment of benign and malignant breast lesions. Patients with grade 3 breast cancer or tumors with high expression of Ki-67 were associated with higher kurtosis and lower diffusivity coefficients; however, this association must be confirmed in prospective studies. (©) RSNA, 2015 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25938679     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.15141625

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  67 in total

1.  Preliminary study of diffusion kurtosis imaging in thyroid nodules and its histopathologic correlation.

Authors:  Ruo-Yang Shi; Qiu-Ying Yao; Qin-Yi Zhou; Qing Lu; Shi-Teng Suo; Jun Chen; Wen-Jie Zheng; Yong-Ming Dai; Lian-Ming Wu; Jian-Rong Xu
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  The value of diffusion kurtosis magnetic resonance imaging for assessing treatment response of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.

Authors:  Jing Yu; Qing Xu; Jia-Cheng Song; Yan Li; Xin Dai; Dong-Ya Huang; Ling Zhang; Yang Li; Hai-Bin Shi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Diffusion-Weighted Imaging With Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Mapping for Breast Cancer Detection as a Stand-Alone Parameter: Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Katja Pinker; Linda Moy; Elizabeth J Sutton; Ritse M Mann; Michael Weber; Sunitha B Thakur; Maxine S Jochelson; Zsuzsanna Bago-Horvath; Elizabeth A Morris; Pascal At Baltzer; Thomas H Helbich
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 6.016

4.  Diffusion kurtosis imaging in the characterisation of rectal cancer: utilizing the most repeatable region-of-interest strategy for diffusion parameters on a 3T scanner.

Authors:  Yiqun Sun; Qin Xiao; Feixiang Hu; Caixia Fu; Huixun Jia; Xu Yan; Chao Xin; Sanjun Cai; Weijun Peng; Xiaolin Wang; Tong Tong; Yajia Gu
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Accuracy of diffusion kurtosis imaging in characterization of breast lesions.

Authors:  Alexandra Christou; Abraham Ghiatas; Dimitrios Priovolos; Konstantia Veliou; Haralambos Bougias
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Optoacoustic response of gold nanorods in soft phantoms using high-power diode laser assemblies at 870 and 905 nm.

Authors:  L Leggio; S Gawali; D Gallego; S Rodríguez; M Sánchez; G Carpintero; H Lamela
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 3.732

7.  Diffusion-weighted breast imaging.

Authors:  K Deike-Hofmann; T Kuder; F König; D Paech; C Dreher; S Delorme; H-P Schlemmer; S Bickelhaupt
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 0.635

8.  Prediction of the treatment outcome using intravoxel incoherent motion and diffusional kurtosis imaging in nasal or sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma patients.

Authors:  Noriyuki Fujima; Daisuke Yoshida; Tomohiro Sakashita; Akihiro Homma; Akiko Tsukahara; Yukie Shimizu; Khin Khin Tha; Kohsuke Kudo; Hiroki Shirato
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Discrimination of Malignant versus Benign Mediastinal Lymph Nodes Using Diffusion MRI with an IVIM Model.

Authors:  Li-Ping Qi; Wan-Pu Yan; Ke-Neng Chen; Zheng Zhong; Xiao-Ting Li; Kejia Cai; Ying-Shi Sun; Xiaohong Joe Zhou
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  Diffusion-weighted breast MRI: Clinical applications and emerging techniques.

Authors:  Savannah C Partridge; Noam Nissan; Habib Rahbar; Averi E Kitsch; Eric E Sigmund
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-09-30       Impact factor: 4.813

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.