Nita Amornsiripanitch1, Habib Rahbar2, Averi E Kitsch2, Diana L Lam2, Brett Weitzel2, Savannah C Partridge3. 1. Breast Imaging, University of Massachusetts Memorial Medical Center, United States. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States. Electronic address: scp3@uw.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the visibility of mammographically occult breast cancers on diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) versus ultrasound. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mammographically occult breast cancers (n=60) initially detected on contrast-enhanced MRI that underwent pre-biopsy targeted ultrasound were retrospectively evaluated for visibility on DWI and ultrasound. RESULTS: More cancers were visible on DWI than ultrasound (78% vs. 63%; p=0.049), with 32 (53%) visible on both and 7 (12%) not visible on either. Visibility differences were more significant in larger lesions (92% vs. 68%, p=0.006). CONCLUSION: DWI may detect more mammographically occult cancers than ultrasound, warranting further investigation as an alternative supplemental screening technique.
PURPOSE: To investigate the visibility of mammographically occult breast cancers on diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) versus ultrasound. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mammographically occult breast cancers (n=60) initially detected on contrast-enhanced MRI that underwent pre-biopsy targeted ultrasound were retrospectively evaluated for visibility on DWI and ultrasound. RESULTS: More cancers were visible on DWI than ultrasound (78% vs. 63%; p=0.049), with 32 (53%) visible on both and 7 (12%) not visible on either. Visibility differences were more significant in larger lesions (92% vs. 68%, p=0.006). CONCLUSION: DWI may detect more mammographically occult cancers than ultrasound, warranting further investigation as an alternative supplemental screening technique.
Authors: John R Scheel; Janie M Lee; Brian L Sprague; Christoph I Lee; Constance D Lehman Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-06-21 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Antonella Petrillo; Roberta Fusco; Mario Sansone; Marilena Cerbone; Salvatore Filice; Annamaria Porto; Maria Rosaria Rubulotta; Massimiliano D'Aiuto; Franca Avino; Maurizio Di Bonito; Gerardo Botti Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: N Bjurstam; L Björneld; S W Duffy; T C Smith; E Cahlin; O Eriksson; L O Hafström; H Lingaas; J Mattsson; S Persson; C M Rudenstam; J Säve-Söderbergh Journal: Cancer Date: 1997-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Karen J Wernli; Wendy B DeMartini; Laura Ichikawa; Constance D Lehman; Tracy Onega; Karla Kerlikowske; Louise M Henderson; Berta M Geller; Mike Hofmann; Bonnie C Yankaskas Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Monika Nothacker; Volker Duda; Markus Hahn; Mathias Warm; Friedrich Degenhardt; Helmut Madjar; Susanne Weinbrenner; Ute-Susann Albert Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2009-09-20 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Ashley M Mendez; Lauren K Fang; Claire H Meriwether; Summer J Batasin; Stéphane Loubrie; Ana E Rodríguez-Soto; Rebecca A Rakow-Penner Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 5.738