Jeon-Hor Chen1, Siwa Chan2, Yi-Ting Tang3, Jia Shen Hon3, Po-Chuan Tseng4, Angela T Cheriyan4, Nikita Rakesh Shah4, Dah-Cherng Yeh5, San-Kan Lee2, Wen-Pin Chen6, Christine E McLaren6, Min-Ying Su4. 1. Tu & Yuen Center for Functional Onco-Imaging, Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, California 92697-5020 and Department of Radiology, E-Da Hospital and I-Shou University, Kaohsiung 82445, Taiwan. 2. Department of Radiology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung 40705, Taiwan. 3. Department of Radiological Technology, China Medical University, Taichung 40402, Taiwan. 4. Tu & Yuen Center for Functional Onco-Imaging, Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Irvine, California 92697-5020. 5. Department of Surgery, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung 40705, Taiwan. 6. Department of Epidemiology, University of California, Irvine, California 92697-5020.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study investigated the impact of arms/hands and body position on the measurement of breast density using MRI. METHODS: Noncontrast-enhanced T1-weighted images were acquired from 32 healthy women. Each subject received four MR scans using different experimental settings, including a high resolution hands-up, a low resolution hands-up, a high resolution hands-down, and finally, another high resolution hands-up after repositioning. The breast segmentation was performed using a fully automatic chest template-based method. The breast volume (BV), fibroglandular tissue volume (FV), and percent density (PD) measured from the four MR scan settings were analyzed. RESULTS: A high correlation of BV, FV, and PD between any pair of the four MR scans was noted (r > 0.98 for all). Using the generalized estimating equation method, a statistically significant difference in mean BV among four settings was noted (left breast, score test p = 0.0056; right breast, score test p = 0.0016), adjusted for age and body mass index. Despite differences in BV, there were no statistically significant differences in the mean PDs among the four settings (p > 0.10 for left and right breasts). Using Bland-Altman plots, the smallest mean difference/bias and standard deviations for BV, FV, and PD were noted when comparing hands-up high vs low resolution when the breast positions were exactly the same. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' study showed that BV, FV, and PD measurements from MRI of different positions were highly correlated. BV may vary with positions but the measured PD did not differ significantly between positions. The study suggested that the percent density analyzed from MRI studies acquired using different arms/hands and body positions from multiple centers can be combined for analysis.
PURPOSE: This study investigated the impact of arms/hands and body position on the measurement of breast density using MRI. METHODS: Noncontrast-enhanced T1-weighted images were acquired from 32 healthy women. Each subject received four MR scans using different experimental settings, including a high resolution hands-up, a low resolution hands-up, a high resolution hands-down, and finally, another high resolution hands-up after repositioning. The breast segmentation was performed using a fully automatic chest template-based method. The breast volume (BV), fibroglandular tissue volume (FV), and percent density (PD) measured from the four MR scan settings were analyzed. RESULTS: A high correlation of BV, FV, and PD between any pair of the four MR scans was noted (r > 0.98 for all). Using the generalized estimating equation method, a statistically significant difference in mean BV among four settings was noted (left breast, score test p = 0.0056; right breast, score test p = 0.0016), adjusted for age and body mass index. Despite differences in BV, there were no statistically significant differences in the mean PDs among the four settings (p > 0.10 for left and right breasts). Using Bland-Altman plots, the smallest mean difference/bias and standard deviations for BV, FV, and PD were noted when comparing hands-up high vs low resolution when the breast positions were exactly the same. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' study showed that BV, FV, and PD measurements from MRI of different positions were highly correlated. BV may vary with positions but the measured PD did not differ significantly between positions. The study suggested that the percent density analyzed from MRI studies acquired using different arms/hands and body positions from multiple centers can be combined for analysis.
Authors: Jun Wei; Heang-Ping Chan; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Berkman Sahiner; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Chuan Zhou; Sophie Paquerault; Thomas Chenevert; Mitchell M Goodsitt Journal: Med Phys Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Valerie K Reed; Wendy A Woodward; Lifei Zhang; Eric A Strom; George H Perkins; Welela Tereffe; Julia L Oh; T Kuan Yu; Isabelle Bedrosian; Gary J Whitman; Thomas A Buchholz; Lei Dong Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Neb Duric; Norman Boyd; Peter Littrup; Mark Sak; Lukasz Myc; Cuiping Li; Erik West; Sal Minkin; Lisa Martin; Martin Yaffe; Steven Schmidt; Muhammad Faiz; Jason Shen; Olga Melnichouk; Qing Li; Teri Albrecht Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Ke Nie; Jeon-Hor Chen; Siwa Chan; Man-Kwun I Chau; Hon J Yu; Shadfar Bahri; Tiffany Tseng; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su Journal: Med Phys Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Norman F Boyd; Gillian S Dite; Jennifer Stone; Anoma Gunasekara; Dallas R English; Margaret R E McCredie; Graham G Giles; David Tritchler; Anna Chiarelli; Martin J Yaffe; John L Hopper Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-09-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Catherine Klifa; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Lisa Wilmes; Anne Laprie; John Shepherd; Jessica Gibbs; Bo Fan; Susan Noworolski; Nola Hylton Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-07-23 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Deborah J Thompson; Martin O Leach; Gek Kwan-Lim; Simon A Gayther; Susan J Ramus; Iqbal Warsi; Fiona Lennard; Michael Khazen; Emilie Bryant; Sadie Reed; Caroline R M Boggis; D Gareth Evans; Rosalind A Eeles; Douglas F Easton; Ruth M L Warren Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2009-11-11 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Leah C Henze Bancroft; Roberta M Strigel; Erin B Macdonald; Colin Longhurst; Jacob Johnson; Diego Hernando; Scott B Reeder Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2021-11-14 Impact factor: 4.668