Yu Tan1, Hui Mai2, Zhiqing Huang1, Li Zhang1, Chengwei Li1, Songxin Wu1, Huang Huang1, Wen Tang1, Yongxi Liu1, Kuiming Jiang3. 1. Department of Radiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, No.521, Xingnan Road, Panyu District, Guangzhou, 511400, China. 2. Department of Radiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China. 3. Department of Radiology, Guangdong Women and Children Hospital, No.521, Xingnan Road, Panyu District, Guangzhou, 511400, China. kmjiang64@sina.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-mass enhancement (NME) is a diagnostic dilemma and highly reliant on the experience of the radiologists. Texture analysis (TA) could serve as an objective method to quantify lesion characteristics. However, it remains unclear what role TA plays in a predictive model based on routine MRI characteristics. The purpose of this study was to explore the value of TA in distinguishing between benign and malignant NME in premenopausal women. METHODS: Women in whom NME was histologically proven (n = 147) were enrolled (benign: 58; malignant: 89) was retrospective. Then, 102 and 45 patients were classified as the training and validation groups, respectively. Scanning sequences included Fat-suppressed T2-weighted and fat-suppressed contrast-enhanced T1-weighted which were acquired on a 1.5T MRI system. Clinical and routine MR characteristics (CRMC) were evaluated by two radiologists according to the Breast Imaging and Reporting and Data system (2013). Texture features were extracted from all post-contrast sequences in the training group. The combination model was built and then assessed in the validation group. Pearson's chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively. Logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic curve were employed to assess the diagnostic performance of CRMC, TA, and their combination model in NME diagnosis. RESULTS: The combination model showed superior diagnostic performance in differentiating between benign and malignant NME compared to that of CRMC or TA alone (AUC, 0.887 vs 0.832 vs 0.74). Moreover, compared to CRMC, the model showed high specificity (72.5% vs 80%). The results obtained in the validation group confirmed the model was promising. CONCLUSIONS: With the combined use of TA and CRMC could afford an improved diagnostic performance in differentiating between benign and malignant NME.
BACKGROUND: Non-mass enhancement (NME) is a diagnostic dilemma and highly reliant on the experience of the radiologists. Texture analysis (TA) could serve as an objective method to quantify lesion characteristics. However, it remains unclear what role TA plays in a predictive model based on routine MRI characteristics. The purpose of this study was to explore the value of TA in distinguishing between benign and malignant NME in premenopausal women. METHODS: Women in whom NME was histologically proven (n = 147) were enrolled (benign: 58; malignant: 89) was retrospective. Then, 102 and 45 patients were classified as the training and validation groups, respectively. Scanning sequences included Fat-suppressed T2-weighted and fat-suppressed contrast-enhanced T1-weighted which were acquired on a 1.5T MRI system. Clinical and routine MR characteristics (CRMC) were evaluated by two radiologists according to the Breast Imaging and Reporting and Data system (2013). Texture features were extracted from all post-contrast sequences in the training group. The combination model was built and then assessed in the validation group. Pearson's chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively. Logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic curve were employed to assess the diagnostic performance of CRMC, TA, and their combination model in NME diagnosis. RESULTS: The combination model showed superior diagnostic performance in differentiating between benign and malignant NME compared to that of CRMC or TA alone (AUC, 0.887 vs 0.832 vs 0.74). Moreover, compared to CRMC, the model showed high specificity (72.5% vs 80%). The results obtained in the validation group confirmed the model was promising. CONCLUSIONS: With the combined use of TA and CRMC could afford an improved diagnostic performance in differentiating between benign and malignant NME.
Authors: Piotr M Szczypiński; Michał Strzelecki; Andrzej Materka; Artur Klepaczko Journal: Comput Methods Programs Biomed Date: 2008-10-14 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Zorica C Milosevic; Mirjan M Nadrljanski; Zorka M Milovanovic; Nina Z Gusic; Slavko S Vucicevic; Olga S Radulovic Journal: Radiol Oncol Date: 2017-05-07 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Jennifer D Brooks; Janice S Sung; Malcolm C Pike; Irene Orlow; Frank Z Stanczyk; Jonine L Bernstein; Elizabeth A Morris Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-03-25 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Yan Li; Zhenlu L Yang; Wenzhi Z Lv; Yanjin J Qin; Caili L Tang; Xu Yan; Yihao H Guo; Liming M Xia; Tao Ai Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-09-22 Impact factor: 6.244