Tianwen Xie1,2, Qiufeng Zhao3, Caixia Fu4, Robert Grimm5, Yajia Gu6,7, Weijun Peng8,9. 1. Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, No. 270 Dong'an Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China. 3. Department of Radiology, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, People's Republic of China. 4. MR Applications Development, Siemens Shenzhen Magnetic Resonance Ltd, Shenzhen, People's Republic of China. 5. MR Application Predevelopment, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany. 6. Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, No. 270 Dong'an Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. cjr.guyajia@vip.163.com. 7. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China. cjr.guyajia@vip.163.com. 8. Department of Radiology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, No. 270 Dong'an Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. pengweijun2017@163.com. 9. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China. pengweijun2017@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine if whole-lesion histogram analysis on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) parametric maps help to improve the diagnostic accuracy of small suspicious breast lesions (≤ 1 cm). METHODS: This retrospective study included 99 female patients with 114 lesions (40 malignant and 74 benign lesions) suspicious on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Two radiologists reviewed all lesions and descripted the morphologic and kinetic characteristics according to BI-RADS by consensus. Whole lesions were segmented on DCE parametric maps (washin and washout), and quantitative histogram features were extracted. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis with forward stepwise covariate selection were performed to identify significant variables. Diagnostic performance was assessed and compared with that of qualitative BI-RADS assessment and quantitative histogram analysis by ROC analysis. RESULTS: For malignancy defined as a washout or plateau pattern, the qualitative kinetic pattern showed a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.023), yielding an AUC of 0.603 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.507, 0.694). The mean and median of washout were independent quantitative predictors of malignancy (p = 0.002, 0.010), achieving an AUC of 0.796 (95% CI: 0. 709, 0.865). The AUC of the quantitative model was better than that of the qualitative model (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the qualitative BI-RADS assessment, quantitative whole-lesion histogram analysis on DCE parametric maps was better to discriminate between small benign and malignant breast lesions (≤ 1 cm) initially defined as suspicious on DCE-MRI. KEY POINTS: • For malignancy defined as a washout or plateau, the kinetic pattern may provide information to diagnose small breast cancer. • The mean and median of washout map were significantly lower for small malignant breast lesions than for benign lesions. • Quantitative histogram analysis on MRI parametric maps improves diagnostic accuracy for small breast cancer, which may obviate unnecessary biopsy.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if whole-lesion histogram analysis on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) parametric maps help to improve the diagnostic accuracy of small suspicious breast lesions (≤ 1 cm). METHODS: This retrospective study included 99 female patients with 114 lesions (40 malignant and 74 benign lesions) suspicious on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).Two radiologists reviewed all lesions and descripted the morphologic and kinetic characteristics according to BI-RADS by consensus. Whole lesions were segmented on DCE parametric maps (washin and washout), and quantitative histogram features were extracted. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis with forward stepwise covariate selection were performed to identify significant variables. Diagnostic performance was assessed and compared with that of qualitative BI-RADS assessment and quantitative histogram analysis by ROC analysis. RESULTS: For malignancy defined as a washout or plateau pattern, the qualitative kinetic pattern showed a significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.023), yielding an AUC of 0.603 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.507, 0.694). The mean and median of washout were independent quantitative predictors of malignancy (p = 0.002, 0.010), achieving an AUC of 0.796 (95% CI: 0. 709, 0.865). The AUC of the quantitative model was better than that of the qualitative model (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the qualitative BI-RADS assessment, quantitative whole-lesion histogram analysis on DCE parametric maps was better to discriminate between small benign and malignant breast lesions (≤ 1 cm) initially defined as suspicious on DCE-MRI. KEY POINTS: • For malignancy defined as a washout or plateau, the kinetic pattern may provide information to diagnose small breast cancer. • The mean and median of washout map were significantly lower for small malignant breast lesions than for benign lesions. • Quantitative histogram analysis on MRI parametric maps improves diagnostic accuracy for small breast cancer, which may obviate unnecessary biopsy.
Authors: S H Heywang-Köbrunner; U Bick; W G Bradley; B Boné; J Casselman; A Coulthard; U Fischer; M Müller-Schimpfle; H Oellinger; R Patt; J Teubner; M Friedrich; G Newstead; R Holland; A Schauer; E A Sickles; L Tabar; J Waisman; K D Wernecke Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2001 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sanaz A Jansen; Xiaobing Fan; Gregory S Karczmar; Hiroyuki Abe; Robert A Schmidt; Gillian M Newstead Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Sarah V Colonna; Ashantice K Higgins; Joann Alvarez; Benjamin R Saville; Julia Lawrence; Vandana G Abramson Journal: Clin Breast Cancer Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: M P Rojas; E Telaro; A Russo; I Moschetti; L Coe; R Fossati; D Palli; Turco M del Roselli; A Liberati Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2005-01-25
Authors: Michael A Jacobs; Peter B Barker; David A Bluemke; Cindy Maranto; Cheryl Arnold; Edward H Herskovits; Zaver Bhujwalla Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: F D Pineda; M Medved; X Fan; M K Ivancevic; H Abe; A Shimauchi; G M Newstead; G S Karczmar Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-03-18 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: J Veltman; M Stoutjesdijk; R Mann; H J Huisman; J O Barentsz; J G Blickman; C Boetes Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-02-13 Impact factor: 5.315