Literature DB >> 27379544

Comparison of Background Parenchymal Enhancement at Contrast-enhanced Spectral Mammography and Breast MR Imaging.

Julie Sogani1, Elizabeth A Morris1, Jennifer B Kaplan1, Donna D'Alessio1, Debra Goldman1, Chaya S Moskowitz1, Maxine S Jochelson1.   

Abstract

Purpose To assess the extent of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) at contrast material-enhanced (CE) spectral mammography and breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, to evaluate interreader agreement in BPE assessment, and to examine the relationships between clinical factors and BPE. Materials and Methods This was a retrospective, institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant study. Two hundred seventy-eight women from 25 to 76 years of age with increased breast cancer risk who underwent CE spectral mammography and MR imaging for screening or staging from 2010 through 2014 were included. Three readers independently rated BPE on CE spectral mammographic and MR images with the ordinal scale: minimal, mild, moderate, or marked. To assess pairwise agreement between BPE levels on CE spectral mammographic and MR images and among readers, weighted κ coefficients with quadratic weights were calculated. For overall agreement, mean κ values and bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals were calculated. The univariate and multivariate associations between BPE and clinical factors were examined by using generalized estimating equations separately for CE spectral mammography and MR imaging. Results Most women had minimal or mild BPE at both CE spectral mammography (68%-76%) and MR imaging (69%-76%). Between CE spectral mammography and MR imaging, the intrareader agreement ranged from moderate to substantial (κ = 0.55-0.67). Overall agreement on BPE levels between CE spectral mammography and MR imaging and among readers was substantial (κ = 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.70). With both modalities, BPE demonstrated significant association with menopausal status, prior breast radiation therapy, hormonal treatment, breast density on CE spectral mammographic images, and amount of fibroglandular tissue on MR images (P < .001 for all). Conclusion There was substantial agreement between readers for BPE detected on CE spectral mammographic and MR images. © RSNA, 2016.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27379544      PMCID: PMC5207122          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016160284

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


  31 in total

1.  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

2.  Effect of aromatase inhibitors on background parenchymal enhancement and amount of fibroglandular tissue at breast MR imaging.

Authors:  Valencia King; Shari B Goldfarb; Jennifer D Brooks; Janice S Sung; Benjamin F Nulsen; Jolanta E Jozefara; Malcolm C Pike; Maura N Dickler; Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  Contrast-enhanced digital mammography.

Authors:  Maxine Jochelson
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2014-01-18       Impact factor: 2.303

4.  Mammographic densities and risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  A F Saftlas; R N Hoover; L A Brinton; M Szklo; D R Olson; M Salane; J N Wolfe
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1991-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Correlation between breast density in mammography and background enhancement in MR mammography.

Authors:  R Cubuk; N Tasali; B Narin; F Keskiner; L Celik; S Guney
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 3.469

6.  Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM).

Authors:  Mark A Francescone; Maxine S Jochelson; D David Dershaw; Janice S Sung; Mary C Hughes; Junting Zheng; Chaya Moskowitz; Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2014-05-16       Impact factor: 3.528

7.  Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography.

Authors:  Felix Diekmann; Martin Freyer; Susanne Diekmann; Eva M Fallenberg; Thomas Fischer; Ulrich Bick; Alexander Pöllinger
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2009-11-19       Impact factor: 3.528

8.  Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience.

Authors:  Roberta A Jong; Martin J Yaffe; Mia Skarpathiotakis; Rene S Shumak; Nathalie M Danjoux; Anoma Gunesekara; Donald B Plewes
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-07-24       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 9.  Contrast-enhanced digital mammography.

Authors:  Clarisse Dromain; Corinne Balleyguier; Ghazal Adler; Jean Remi Garbay; Suzette Delaloge
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2008-09-13       Impact factor: 3.528

10.  Effects of tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors on breast tissue enhancement in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging: a longitudinal intraindividual cohort study.

Authors:  Simone Schrading; Hans Schild; Marietta Kühr; Christiane Kuhl
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  14 in total

1.  Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Janice S Sung; Lizza Lebron; Delia Keating; Donna D'Alessio; Christopher E Comstock; Carol H Lee; Malcolm C Pike; Miranda Ayhan; Chaya S Moskowitz; Elizabeth A Morris; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-08-27       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Using deep learning to safely exclude lesions with only ultrafast breast MRI to shorten acquisition and reading time.

Authors:  Xueping Jing; Mirjam Wielema; Ludo J Cornelissen; Margo van Gent; Willie M Iwema; Sunyi Zheng; Paul E Sijens; Matthijs Oudkerk; Monique D Dorrius; Peter M A van Ooijen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Background Parenchymal Enhancement in Contrast-enhanced Spectral Mammography: A Retrospective Analysis and a Pictorial Review of Clinical Cases.

Authors:  Rosaria Meucci; Chiara Adriana Pistolese; Tommaso Perretta; Gianluca Vanni; Emanuela Beninati; Federica DI Tosto; Maria Lina Serio; Aurelia Caliandro; Marco Materazzo; Marco Pellicciaro; Oreste Claudio Buonomo
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

4.  Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI.

Authors:  Sachiko Yuen; Shuichi Monzawa; Ayako Gose; Seiji Yanai; Yoshihiro Yata; Hajime Matsumoto; You Ichinose; Takashi Tashiro; Kazuhiko Yamagami
Journal:  Breast Cancer       Date:  2022-02-26       Impact factor: 4.239

Review 5.  Contrast-enhanced mammography: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Julie Sogani; Victoria L Mango; Delia Keating; Janice S Sung; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2020-09-19       Impact factor: 1.605

6.  Contrast-Enhanced Mammography for Screening Women after Breast Conserving Surgery.

Authors:  Jill Gluskin; Carolina Rossi Saccarelli; Daly Avendano; Maria Adele Marino; Almir G V Bitencourt; Melissa Pilewskie; Varadan Sevilimedu; Janice S Sung; Katja Pinker; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 6.639

7.  Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Matteo Basilio Suter; Filippo Pesapane; Giorgio Maria Agazzi; Tania Gagliardi; Olga Nigro; Anna Bozzini; Francesca Priolo; Silvia Penco; Enrico Cassano; Claudio Chini; Alessandro Squizzato
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 4.380

8.  Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography versus Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Preoperative Evaluation of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Eun Young Kim; Inyoung Youn; Kwan Ho Lee; Ji-Sup Yun; Yong Lai Park; Chan Heun Park; Juhee Moon; Seon Hyeong Choi; Yoon Jung Choi; Soo-Youn Ham; Shin Ho Kook
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2018-12-26       Impact factor: 3.588

9.  MRI background parenchymal enhancement, fibroglandular tissue, and mammographic breast density in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer on adjuvant endocrine hormonal treatment: associations with survival.

Authors:  Roberto Lo Gullo; Isaac Daimiel; Carolina Rossi Saccarelli; Almir Bitencourt; Varadan Sevilimedu; Danny F Martinez; Maxine S Jochelson; Elizabeth A Morris; Jeffrey S Reiner; Katja Pinker
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2020-08-20       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography-Based Radiomics Nomogram for Identifying Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions of Sub-1 cm.

Authors:  Fan Lin; Zhongyi Wang; Kun Zhang; Ping Yang; Heng Ma; Yinghong Shi; Meijie Liu; Qinglin Wang; Jingjing Cui; Ning Mao; Haizhu Xie
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.