T J A van Nijnatten1, R J Schipper2, M B I Lobbes3, L M van Roozendaal4, S Vöö3, M Moossdorff5, M-L Paiman3, B de Vries6, K B M I Keymeulen7, J E Wildberger3, M L Smidt5, R G H Beets-Tan8. 1. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands; GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: Thiemovn@gmail.com. 2. Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Hospital, Heerlen, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands; GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Pathology, Zuyderland Hospital, Heerlen, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 8. GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate diagnostic performance of gadofosveset (GDF)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in addition to T2-weighted (T2W) MRI for nodal (re)staging in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety patients underwent axillary T2W- and GDF-MRI. Two radiologists independently scored each lymph node; first on T2W-MRI, subsequently adjusting their score on GDF-MRI. Diagnostic performance parameters were calculated on node-by-node and patient-by-patient validation with histopathology as the reference standard. Furthermore, learning curve analysis for reading GDF-MRI was performed. RESULTS: In patient-by-patient validation, overall reader performances for T2W- and GDF-MRI were similar with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) of 0.75 and 0.77 (p=0.731) for reader 1 and 0.79 and 0.72 (p=0.156) for reader 2. For node-by-node validation, AUC values of T2W- and GDF-MRI were 0.76 and 0.82 (p=0.018) and 0.77 and 0.77 (p=0.998) for reader 1 and 2. The AUC for reader 1 was 0.71 for first one-third of nodes evaluated, improving to 0.80 and 0.95 for the next and last one-third, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) improved from 38%, 89%, 56%, and 79% to 60%, 93%, 64%, and 92%. The AUC of reader 2 improved from 0.69 to 0.79. CONCLUSION: The present study confirmed that GDF-MRI, in addition to T2W-MRI, has potential as a non-invasive method for nodal (re)staging in breast cancer.
AIM: To evaluate diagnostic performance of gadofosveset (GDF)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in addition to T2-weighted (T2W) MRI for nodal (re)staging in newly diagnosed breast cancerpatients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety patients underwent axillary T2W- and GDF-MRI. Two radiologists independently scored each lymph node; first on T2W-MRI, subsequently adjusting their score on GDF-MRI. Diagnostic performance parameters were calculated on node-by-node and patient-by-patient validation with histopathology as the reference standard. Furthermore, learning curve analysis for reading GDF-MRI was performed. RESULTS: In patient-by-patient validation, overall reader performances for T2W- and GDF-MRI were similar with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) of 0.75 and 0.77 (p=0.731) for reader 1 and 0.79 and 0.72 (p=0.156) for reader 2. For node-by-node validation, AUC values of T2W- and GDF-MRI were 0.76 and 0.82 (p=0.018) and 0.77 and 0.77 (p=0.998) for reader 1 and 2. The AUC for reader 1 was 0.71 for first one-third of nodes evaluated, improving to 0.80 and 0.95 for the next and last one-third, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) improved from 38%, 89%, 56%, and 79% to 60%, 93%, 64%, and 92%. The AUC of reader 2 improved from 0.69 to 0.79. CONCLUSION: The present study confirmed that GDF-MRI, in addition to T2W-MRI, has potential as a non-invasive method for nodal (re)staging in breast cancer.
Authors: Renee Cattell; Jia Ying; Lan Lei; Jie Ding; Shenglan Chen; Mario Serrano Sosa; Chuan Huang Journal: Vis Comput Ind Biomed Art Date: 2022-03-07