Literature DB >> 35782247

A simplified scoring protocol to improve diagnostic accuracy with the breast imaging reporting and data system in breast magnetic resonance imaging.

Liuquan Cheng1, Xiru Li2, Yuting Zhong3,2, Menglu Li1, Jingjin Zhu2,4, Boya Zhang2,4, Mei Liu5, Zhili Wang6, Jiandong Wang2, Yiqiong Zheng2.   

Abstract

Background: The breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) lexicon provides a standardized terminology for describing leision characteristics but does not provide defined rules for converting specific imaging features into diagnostic categories. The inter-reader agreement of the BI-RADS is moderate. In this study, we explored the use of a simplified protocol and scoring system for BI-RADS categorization which integrates the morphologic features (MF), kinetic time-intensity curve (TIC), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values with equal weights, with a view to providing a convenient and practical method for breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and improving the inter-reader agreement and diagnostic performance of BI-RADS.
Methods: This cross-sectional, retrospective, single-center study included 879 patients with 898 histopathologically verified lesions who underwent an MRI scan on a 3.0 Tesla GE Discovery 750 MRI scanner between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020. The BI-RADS categorization of the studied lesions was assessed according to the sum of the assigned scores (the presence of malignant MF, lower ADC, and suspicious TIC each warranted a score of +1). Total scores of +2 and +3 were classified as category 5, scores of +1 were classified as category 4, and scores of +0 but with other lesions of interest were classified as category 3. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted, and the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of this categorization were investigated to assess its efficacy and its consistency with pathology.
Results: There were 472 malignant, 104 risk, and 322 benign lesions. Our simplified scoring protocol had high diagnostic accuracy, with an area under curve (AUC) value of 0.896. In terms of the borderline effect of pathological risk and category 4 lesions, our results showed that when risk lesions were classified together with malignant ones, the AUC value improved (0.876 vs. 0.844 and 0.909 vs. 0.900). When category 4 and 5 lesions were classified as malignant, the specificity, accuracy, and AUC value decreased (82.3% vs. 93.2%, 89.3% vs. 90.2%, and 0.876 vs. 0.909, respectively). Therefore, to improve the diagnostic accuracy of the protocol for BI-RADS categorization, only category 5 lesions should be considered to be malignant. Conclusions: Our simplified scoring protocol that integrates MF, TIC, and ADC values with equal weights for BI-RADS categorization could improve both the diagnostic performance of the protocol for BI-RADS categorization in clinical practice and the understanding of the benign-risk-malignant breast diseases. 2022 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS); diagnostic accuracy; scoring protocol

Year:  2022        PMID: 35782247      PMCID: PMC9246725          DOI: 10.21037/qims-21-1036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg        ISSN: 2223-4306


  49 in total

1.  Intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging as an adjunct to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to improve accuracy of the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions.

Authors:  Dejing Ma; Feng Lu; Xuexue Zou; Hu Zhang; Yangyang Li; Lin Zhang; Liang Chen; Dongjing Qin; Bin Wang
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 2.546

2.  Probability of malignancy for lesions detected on breast MRI: a predictive model incorporating BI-RADS imaging features and patient characteristics.

Authors:  Wendy B Demartini; Brenda F Kurland; Robert L Gutierrez; C Craig Blackmore; Sue Peacock; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-02-27       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative assessment of patients with primary breast cancer: systematic review of diagnostic accuracy and meta-analysis.

Authors:  María Nieves Plana; Carmen Carreira; Alfonso Muriel; Miguel Chiva; Víctor Abraira; Jose Ignacio Emparanza; Xavier Bonfill; Javier Zamora
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Triple-modality screening trial for familial breast cancer underlines the importance of magnetic resonance imaging and questions the role of mammography and ultrasound regardless of patient mutation status, age, and breast density.

Authors:  Christopher C Riedl; Nikolaus Luft; Clemens Bernhart; Michael Weber; Maria Bernathova; Muy-Kheng M Tea; Margaretha Rudas; Christian F Singer; Thomas H Helbich
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-02-23       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 5.  Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer.

Authors:  Nehmat Houssami; Stefano Ciatto; Petra Macaskill; Sarah J Lord; Ruth M Warren; J Michael Dixon; Les Irwig
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-05-12       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 6.  Breast MRI in clinically and mammographically occult breast cancer presenting with an axillary metastasis: a systematic review.

Authors:  J de Bresser; B de Vos; F van der Ent; K Hulsewé
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 4.424

7.  A simple classification system (the Tree flowchart) for breast MRI can reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies in MRI-only lesions.

Authors:  Ramona Woitek; Claudio Spick; Melanie Schernthaner; Margaretha Rudas; Panagiotis Kapetas; Maria Bernathova; Julia Furtner; Katja Pinker; Thomas H Helbich; Pascal A T Baltzer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Breast cancer and background parenchymal enhancement at breast magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Na Hu; Jinghao Zhao; Yong Li; Quanshui Fu; Linwei Zhao; Hong Chen; Wei Qin; Guoqing Yang
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 1.930

9.  Accuracy of Preoperative Breast MRI Versus Conventional Imaging in Measuring Pathologic Extent of Invasive Lobular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Keegan K Hovis; Janie M Lee; Daniel S Hippe; Hannah Linden; Meghan R Flanagan; Mark R Kilgore; Janis Yee; Savannah C Partridge; Habib Rahbar
Journal:  J Breast Imaging       Date:  2021-04-29

10.  Malignancy rates of B3-lesions in breast magnetic resonance imaging - do all lesions have to be excised?

Authors:  H Preibsch; L K Wanner; A Staebler; M Hahn; K C Siegmann-Luz
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 1.930

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.