nach oben

Erschienen in:

14.01.2020 | Clinical trial

Double reading of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer detection

verfasst von: Anna Rotili, Rubina Manuela Trimboli, Silvia Penco, Filippo Pesapane, Priyan Tantrige, Enrico Cassano, Francesco Sardanelli

Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Ausgabe 1/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To estimate the performance of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for breast cancer detection.

Methods

Consecutive breast magnetic resonance imaging examinations performed from January to September 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Examinations performed before/after neoadjuvant therapy, lacking DWI sequences or reference standard were excluded; breasts after mastectomy were also excluded. Two experienced breast radiologists (R1, R2) independently evaluated only DWI. Final pathology or > 1-year follow-up served as reference standard. Mc Nemar, χ², and κ statistics were applied.

Results

Of 1,131 examinations, 672 (59.4%) lacked DWI sequence, 41 (3.6%) had no reference standard, 30 (2.7%) were performed before/after neoadjuvant therapy, and 10 (0.9%) had undergone bilateral mastectomy. Thus, 378 women aged 49 ± 11 years (mean ± standard deviation) were included, 51 (13%) with unilateral mastectomy, totaling 705 breasts. Per-breast cancer prevalence was 96/705 (13.6%). Per-breast sensitivity was 83/96 (87%, 95% confidence interval 78–93%) for both R1 and R2, 89/96 (93%, 86–97%) for double reading (DR) (p = 0.031); per-lesion DR sensitivity for cancers ≤ 10 mm was 22/31 (71%, 52–86%). Per-breast specificity was 562/609 (93%, 90–94%) for R1, 538/609 (88%, 86–91%) for R2, and 526/609 (86%¸ 83–89%) for DR (p < 0.001). Inter-observer agreement was substantial (κ = 0.736). Acquisition time varied from 3:00 to 6:22 min:s. Per-patient median interpretation time was 46 s (R1) and 51 s (R2).

Conclusions

DR DWI showed a 93% sensitivity and 88% specificity, with 71% sensitivity for cancers ≤ 10 mm, pointing out a potential for DWI as stand-alone screening method.

Zhang L, Tang M, Min Z, Lu J, Lei X, Zhang X (2016) Accuracy of combined dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging for breast cancer detection: a meta-analysis. Acta Radiol 57:651–660. https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185115597265 CrossRefPubMed

Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W et al (2007) American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 57:75–89CrossRefPubMed

Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 46:1296–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015 CrossRefPubMed

Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D et al (2010) Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 7:18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2009.09.022 CrossRefPubMed

Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP et al (2016) Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 164:268–278. https://doi.org/10.7326/M15-1789 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Houssami N, Turner RM (2016) Rapid review: estimates of incremental breast cancer detection from tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) screening in women with dense breasts. Breast 30:141–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2016.09.008 CrossRefPubMed

Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Moy L et al (2018) Breast cancer screening in women at higher-than-average risk: recommendations from the ACR. J Am Coll Radiol 15(3 Pt A):408–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2017.11.034 CrossRefPubMed

Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K et al (2014) Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection—a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. J Clin Oncol 32:2304–2310. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.52.5386 CrossRefPubMed

Grimm LJ, Soo MS, Yoon S et al (2015) Abbreviated screening protocol for breast MRI: a feasibility study. Acad Radiol 22:1157–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2015.06.004 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Ko ES, Morris EA (2019) Abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer screening: concept, early results, and considerations. Korean J Radiol 20:533–541. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.0722 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Mahoney MC, Newell MS (2013) Screening MR imaging versus screening ultrasound: pros and cons. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 21:495–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2013.04.001 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Costa AF, van der Pol CB, Maralani PJ et al (2018) Gadolinium deposition in the brain: a systematic review of existing guidelines and policy statement issued by the Canadian Association of Radiologists. Can Assoc Radiol J 69:373–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carj.2018.04.002 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Gulani V, Calamante F, Shellock FG, Kanal E, Reeder SB (2017) Gadolinium deposition in the brain: summary of evidence and recommendations. Lancet Neurol 16:564–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30158-8 CrossRefPubMed

14.

European Medicines Agency (2017) Human medicines. Gadolinium-containing contrast agents. https://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/human/referrals/Gadolinium-containing_contrast_agents/human_referral_prac_000056.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac05805c516f. Accessed 8 Aug 2019

15.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2017). Medical imaging drug advisory committee. https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/MedicalImagingDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/ucm553470.htm. Accessed 8 Aug 2019

16.

Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Grenier P, Cabanis E, Laval-Jeantet M (1986) MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 161:401–407. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.161.2.3763909 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Chen X, Li WL, Zhang YL, Wu Q, Guo YM, Bai ZL (2010) Meta-analysis of quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. BMC Cancer 10:693. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-693 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Dorrius MD, Dijkstra H, Oudkerk M, Sijens PE (2014) Effect of b value and pre-admission of contrast on diagnostic accuracy of 1.5-T breast DWI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 24:2835–2847. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3338-z CrossRefPubMed

19.

Sardanelli F, Carbonaro LA, Montemezzi S, Cavedon C, Trimboli RM (2016) Clinical breast MR using MRS or DWI: who is the winner? Front Oncol 6:217. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2016.00217 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Clauser P, Mann R, Athanasiou A et al (2018) A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice. Eur Radiol 28:1909–1918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5121-4 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174PubMed

22.

Shi RY, Yao QY, Wu LM, Xu JR (2018) Breast lesions: diagnosis using diffusion weighted imaging at 1.5T and 3.0T—systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Breast Cancer 18:e305–e320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2017.06.011 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bickelhaupt S, Laun FB, Tesdorff J et al (2016) Fast and noninvasive characterization of suspicious lesions detected at breast cancer X-ray screening: capability of diffusion-weighted MR imaging with MIPs. Radiology 278:689–697. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015150425 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Yabuuchi H, Matsuo Y, Sunami S et al (2011) Detection of non-palpable breast cancer in asymptomatic women by using unenhanced diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted MR imaging: comparison with mammography and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 21:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1890-8 CrossRefPubMed

25.

Wu LM, Chen J, Hu J, Gu HY, Xu JR, Hua J (2014) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging combined with T2-weighted images in the detection of small breast cancer: a single-center multi-observer study. Acta Radiol 55:24–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185113492458 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Trimboli RM, VerardiN CF et al (2014) Breast cancer detection using double reading of unenhanced MRI including T1-weighted, T2-weighted STIR, and diffusion-weighted imaging: a proof of concept study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:674–681. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.11816 CrossRefPubMed

27.

Baltzer PAT, Bickel H, Spick C et al (2018) Potential of noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging in characterization of breast lesions: intraindividual comparison with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 53:229–235. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000433 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Harvey SC, Geller B, Oppenheimer RG et al (2003) Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:1461–1467CrossRefPubMed

29.

Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al (2005) Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 353:1773–1783. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa052911 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Moss SM, Wale C, Smith R et al (2015) Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality in the UK age trial at 17 years’ follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 16:1123–1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00128-X CrossRefPubMed

31.

Törnberg S, Kemetli L, Ascunce N et al (2010) A pooled analysis of interval cancer rates in six European countries. Eur J Cancer Prev 19:87–93. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0b013e32833548ed CrossRefPubMed

32.

Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB et al (2007) MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet 370:485–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61232-X CrossRefPubMed

33.

Rahbar H, Partridge SC, Eby PR et al (2011) Characterization of ductal carcinoma in situ on diffusion weighted breast MRI. Eur Radiol 21:2011–2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2140-4 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Ding JR, Wang DN, Pan JL (2016) Apparent diffusion coefficient value of diffusion-weighted imaging for differential diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ and infiltrating ductal carcinoma. J Cancer Res Ther 12:744–750. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1482.154093 CrossRefPubMed

35.

Imamura T, Isomoto I, Sueyoshi E et al (2010) Diagnostic performance of ADC for non-mass-like breast lesions on MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 9:217–225. https://doi.org/10.2463/mrms.9.217 CrossRefPubMed

36.

Baltzer PA, Renz DM, Herrmann KH et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in MR mammography (MRM): clinical comparison of echo planar imaging (EPI) and half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo (HASTE) diffusion techniques. Eur Radiol 19:1612–1620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1326-5 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Tao WJ, Zhang HX, Zhang LM et al (2019) Combined application of pharmacokinetic DCE-MRI and IVIM-DWI could improve detection efficiency in early diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Appl Clin Med Phys 20:142–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12624 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Surov A, Meyer HJ, Wienke A (2017) Correlation between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and cellularity is different in several tumors: a meta-analysis. Oncotarget 8:59492–59499. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.17752 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

McDonald ES, Hammersley JA, Chou SH et al (2016) Performance of DWI as a rapid unenhanced technique for detecting mammographically occult breast cancer in elevated-risk women with dense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 207:205–216. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.15873 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D et al (2015) Breast-cancer screening—viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med 372:2353–2358. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsr1504363 CrossRefPubMed

41.

Hendrick RE (2018) Obligate overdiagnosis due to mammographic screening: a direct estimate for U.S. women. Radiology 287:391–397. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017171622 CrossRefPubMed

42.

Sardanelli F, Trimboli RM, Tot T (2018) Expert review of breast pathology in borderline lesions: a chance to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment? JAMA Oncol 4:1325–1326. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.1953 CrossRefPubMed

43.

Iacconi C, Galman L, Zheng J et al (2016) Multicentric cancer detected at breast MR imaging and not at mammography: important or not? Radiology 279:378–384. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015150796 CrossRefPubMed

44.

Bick U, Engel C, Krug B et al (2019) High-risk breast cancer surveillance with MRI: 10-year experience from the German consortium for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 175:217–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05152-9 CrossRefPubMed

45.

Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK et al (2005) Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet 365:1769–1778. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66481-1 CrossRefPubMed

46.

Kuhl C, Weigel S, Schrading S et al (2010) Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial. J Clin Oncol 28:1450–1457. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.0839 CrossRefPubMed

47.

Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F et al (2011) Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk Italian 1 study): final results. Invest Radiol 46:94–105. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181f3fcdf CrossRefPubMed

48.

Evans DG, Kesavan N, Lim Y et al (2014) MRI breast screening in high-risk women: cancer detection and survival analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 145:663–672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-014-2931-9 CrossRefPubMed

49.

Saadatmand S, Obdeijn IM, Rutgers EJ et al (2015) Survival benefit in women with BRCA1 mutation or familial risk in the MRI screening study (MRISC). Int J Cancer 137:1729–1738. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29534 CrossRefPubMed

50.

Podo F, Santoro F, Di Leo G et al (2016) Triple-negative versus non-triple-negative breast cancers in high-risk women: phenotype features and survival from the HIBCRIT-1 MRI-including screening study. Clin Cancer Res 22:895–904. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0459 CrossRefPubMed

51.

Hunt CH, Hartman RP, Hesley GK (2009) Frequency and severity of adverse effects of iodinated and gadolinium contrast materials: retrospective review of 456,930 doses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1124–1127. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2520 CrossRefPubMed

52.

Wisner DJ, Rogers N, Deshpande VS et al (2014) High-resolution diffusion-weighted imaging for the separation of benign from malignant BI-RADS 4/5 lesions found on breast MRI at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 40:674–681. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24416 CrossRefPubMed

53.

Barentsz MW, Taviani V, Chang JM et al (2015) Assessment of tumor morphology on diffusion-weighted (DWI) breast MRI: diagnostic value of reduced field of view DWI. J Magn Reson Imaging 42:1656–1665. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24929 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Baltzer PAT (2019) DWI, spectroscopy and other advanced breast MR techniques. Eur Congr Radiol 201910(Suppl 1):22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0713-y CrossRef

55.

Torre LA, Siegel RL, Ward EM et al (2016) Global cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends—an update. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 25:16–27. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0578 CrossRefPubMed

56.

Amornsiripanitch N, Bickelhaupt S, Shin HJ et al (2019) Diffusion-weighted MRI for unenhanced breast cancer screening. Radiology 293:504–520. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019182789 CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Double reading of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer detection
verfasst von: Anna Rotili
Rubina Manuela Trimboli
Silvia Penco
Filippo Pesapane
Priyan Tantrige
Enrico Cassano
Francesco Sardanelli
Publikationsdatum: 14.01.2020
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Ausgabe 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05519-y

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

19.04.2024 | EAU 2024 | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Double reading of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer detection

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Prostatakarzinom: EU initiiert neues Screeningkonzept

Blasenkarzinom – Biomarker statt Zytologie?

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Adjuvante Brustkrebstherapie: Doppelt hält besser

Update Onkologie

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2020

Cytotoxic T cell depletion with increasing epithelial abnormality in women with benign breast disease

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Patient-reported outcome after oncoplastic breast surgery compared with conventional breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer

Breast cancer tumor histopathology, stage at presentation, and treatment in the extremes of age

Significance of glucocorticoid signaling in triple-negative breast cancer patients: a newly revealed interaction with androgen signaling

Increased androgen receptor expression in estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Prostatakarzinom: EU initiiert neues Screeningkonzept

Blasenkarzinom – Biomarker statt Zytologie?

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Adjuvante Brustkrebstherapie: Doppelt hält besser

Update Onkologie