Hubert Bickel1, Katja Pinker1, Stephan Polanec1, Heinrich Magometschnigg1, Georg Wengert1, Claudio Spick1, Wolfgang Bogner2, Zsuzsanna Bago-Horvath3, Thomas H Helbich4, Pascal Baltzer1. 1. Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. 2. Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University Vienna - MR Center of Excellence, Vienna, Austria. 3. Department of Pathology, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 4. Division of Molecular and Gender Imaging, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. thomas.helbich@meduniwien.ac.at.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influence of region-of-interest (ROI) placement and different apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameters on ADC values, diagnostic performance, reproducibility and measurement time in breast tumours. METHODS: In this IRB-approved, retrospective study, 149 histopathologically proven breast tumours (109 malignant, 40 benign) in 147 women (mean age 53.2) were investigated. Three radiologists independently measured minimum, mean and maximum ADC, each using three ROI placement approaches:1 - small 2D-ROI, 2 - large 2D-ROI and 3 - 3D-ROI covering the whole lesion. One reader performed all measurements twice. Median ADC values, diagnostic performance, reproducibility, and measurement time were calculated and compared between all combinations of ROI placement approaches and ADC parameters. RESULTS: Median ADC values differed significantly between the ROI placement approaches (p < .001). Minimum ADC showed the best diagnostic performance (AUC .928-.956), followed by mean ADC obtained from 2D ROIs (.926-.94). Minimum and mean ADC showed high intra- (ICC .85-.94) and inter-reader reproducibility (ICC .74-.94). Median measurement time was significantly shorter for the 2D ROIs (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: ROI placement significantly influences ADC values measured in breast tumours. Minimum and mean ADC acquired from 2D-ROIs are useful for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions, and are highly reproducible, with rapid measurement. KEY POINTS: • Region of interest placement significantly influences apparent diffusion coefficient of breast tumours. • Minimum and mean apparent diffusion coefficient perform best and are reproducible. • 2D regions of interest perform best and provide rapid measurement times.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influence of region-of-interest (ROI) placement and different apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) parameters on ADC values, diagnostic performance, reproducibility and measurement time in breast tumours. METHODS: In this IRB-approved, retrospective study, 149 histopathologically proven breast tumours (109 malignant, 40 benign) in 147 women (mean age 53.2) were investigated. Three radiologists independently measured minimum, mean and maximum ADC, each using three ROI placement approaches:1 - small 2D-ROI, 2 - large 2D-ROI and 3 - 3D-ROI covering the whole lesion. One reader performed all measurements twice. Median ADC values, diagnostic performance, reproducibility, and measurement time were calculated and compared between all combinations of ROI placement approaches and ADC parameters. RESULTS: Median ADC values differed significantly between the ROI placement approaches (p < .001). Minimum ADC showed the best diagnostic performance (AUC .928-.956), followed by mean ADC obtained from 2D ROIs (.926-.94). Minimum and mean ADC showed high intra- (ICC .85-.94) and inter-reader reproducibility (ICC .74-.94). Median measurement time was significantly shorter for the 2D ROIs (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: ROI placement significantly influences ADC values measured in breast tumours. Minimum and mean ADC acquired from 2D-ROIs are useful for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions, and are highly reproducible, with rapid measurement. KEY POINTS: • Region of interest placement significantly influences apparent diffusion coefficient of breast tumours. • Minimum and mean apparent diffusion coefficient perform best and are reproducible. • 2D regions of interest perform best and provide rapid measurement times.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic resonance imaging; Molecular imaging; Reproducibility of results and findings
Authors: Savannah C Partridge; Christiane D Mullins; Brenda F Kurland; Michael D Allain; Wendy B DeMartini; Peter R Eby; Constance D Lehman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Wolfgang Bogner; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Hubert Bickel; Marek Chmelik; Michael Weber; Thomas H Helbich; Siegfried Trattnig; Stephan Gruber Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 11.105
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
Authors: Habib Rahbar; Zheng Zhang; Thomas L Chenevert; Justin Romanoff; Averi E Kitsch; Lucy G Hanna; Sara M Harvey; Linda Moy; Wendy B DeMartini; Basak Dogan; Wei T Yang; Lilian C Wang; Bonnie N Joe; Karen Y Oh; Colleen H Neal; Elizabeth S McDonald; Mitchell D Schnall; Constance D Lehman; Christopher E Comstock; Savannah C Partridge Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-01-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Jin You Kim; Jin Joo Kim; Ji Won Lee; Nam Kyung Lee; Geewon Lee; Taewoo Kang; Heesung Park; Yo Han Son; Robert Grimm Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: David C Newitt; Zheng Zhang; Jessica E Gibbs; Savannah C Partridge; Thomas L Chenevert; Mark A Rosen; Patrick J Bolan; Helga S Marques; Sheye Aliu; Wen Li; Lisa Cimino; Bonnie N Joe; Heidi Umphrey; Haydee Ojeda-Fournier; Basak Dogan; Karen Oh; Hiroyuki Abe; Jennifer Drukteinis; Laura J Esserman; Nola M Hylton Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 4.813