Validation of semiautomatic measurement of the extent of breast tumors using contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 42-49

  Alderliesten, Tanja ^a   Schlief, Angelique ^a   Peterse, Johannes ^a   Loo, Claudette ^a   Teertstra, Hendrik ^a   Muller, Sara ^a   Gilhuijs, Kenneth ^a  

^a ANTONI VAN LEEUWENHOEK HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Contrast enhanced MRI; Extent; Segmentation; Tumor

Indexed keywords

GADOTERIDOL;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; EXCISION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; TUMOR VOLUME; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 33846109781     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000248849.99014.7e     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer. 1989;63:181-187.
2. Fitzgibbons PL, Page DL, Weaver D, et al. Prognostic factors in breast cancer. College of American pathologists consensus statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000;124:966-978.
3. Reddy DH, Mendelson EB. Incorporating new imaging models in breast cancer management. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2005;6:135-145.
4. Akazawa K, Tamaki Y, Taguchi T, et al. Preoperative evaluation of residual tumor extent by three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast J. 2006;12:130-137.
5. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205-216.
6. Padhani AR, Ollivier L. The RECIST criteria: implications for diagnostic radiologists. Br J Radiol. 2001;74:983-986.
7. Thiesse P, Ollivier L, Di Stefano-Louineau D, et al. Response rate accuracy in oncology trials: reason for interobserver variability. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:3507-3514.
8. Erasmus JJ, Gladish GW, Broemeling L, et al. Interobserver and intraobserver variability in measurement of non-small-cell carcinoma lung lesions: implications for assessment of tumor response. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:2574-2582.
9. Klein Zeggelink WF, Deurloo EE, Bartelink H, et al. Reproducibility of the assessment of tumor extent in the breast using multiple image modalities. Med Phys. 2003;30:2919-2926.
10. Stoutjesdijk MJ, Futterer JJ, Boetes C, et al. Variability in the description of morphologic and contrast enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:355-362.
11. Preda A, Turetschek K, Daldrup H, et al. The choice of region of interest measures in contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance image characterization of experimental breast tumors. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:349-354.
12. Lucas-Quesada FA, Sinha U, Sinha S. Segmentation strategies for breast tumors from dynamic MR images. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1996;6:753-763.
13. den Boer JA, Hoenderop RKKM, Smink J, et al. Pharmacokinetic analysis of Gd-DTPA enhancement in dynamic three-dimensional MRI of breast lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1997;7:702-715.
14. Penn AI, Bolinger L, Schnall MD, et al. Discrimination of MR images of breast masses with fractal-interpolation function models. Acad Radiol. 1999;6:156-163.
15. Lucht R, Delorme S, Brix G. Neural network-based segmentation of dynamic MR mammographic images. Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;20:147-154.
16. Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, et al. MRI measurements of breast tumor volume predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence-free survival. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:1774-1781.
17. DeMartini WB, Lehman CD, Peacock S, et al. Computer-aided detection applied to breast MRI: assessment of CAD-generated enhancement and tumor sizes in breast cancers before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Acad Radiol. 2005;12:806-814.
18. Gilhuijs KGA, Giger ML, Bick U. A method for computerized assessment of tumor extent in contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast. In: Doi K, MacMahon H, Giger ML, et al, eds. Computer Aided Diagnosis in Medical Imaging. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science B.V.; 1999:305-310.
19. Egan RL. Multicentric breast carcinomas: clinical-radiographic-pathologic whole organ studies and 10-year survival. Cancer. 1982;49:1123-1130.
20. Gilhuijs KGA, Deurloo EE, Muller SH, et al. Breast MR imaging in women at increased lifetime risk of breast cancer: clinical system for computerized assessment of breast lesions - initial results. Radiology. 2002;225:907-916.
21. Otsu N. A threshold selection method from gray-value histograms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern. 1979;9:62-66.
22. Pitman EJ. A note on normal correlation. Biometrika. 1939;31:9-12.
23. Morgan WA. A test for the significance of the difference between the two variances in a sample from a normal bivariate population. Biometrika. 1939;31:13-19.
24. Boetes C, Mus RDM, Holland R, et al. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent. Radiology. 1995;197:743-747.
25. Davis PL, Staiger MJ, Harris KB, et al. Breast cancer measurements with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasonography, and mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1996;37:1-9.
26. Amano G, Ohuchi N, Ishibashi T, et al. Correlation of three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging with precise histopathological map concerning carcinoma extension in the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2000;60:43-55.
27. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004;233:830-849.