Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of invasive ductal carcinoma: Influence of histological scirrhous component on MR descriptors

Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 137-146

  Tozaki, Mitsuhiro ^a,b   Fukuda, Kunihiko ^b   Suzuki, Masafumi ^b  

^a KAMEDA MEDICAL CENTER   (Japan)

^b JIKEI UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasm; Dynamic study; Invasive ductal carcinoma; MR imaging; Perfusion study

Indexed keywords

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER INVASION; FEMALE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADENOCARCINOMA, SCIRRHOUS; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 39049185564     PISSN: 13473182     EISSN: 18802206     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2463/mrms.5.137     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Heywang SH, Wolf A, Pruss E, Hilbertz T, Eiermann W, Permanetter W. MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology 1989; 171:95-103.
2. Kaiser WA, Zeitler E. MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 1989; 170:681-686.
3. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, et al. MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 1993; 187:493-501.
4. Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, Troupin RH. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994; 190:485-493.
5. Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD, et al. MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced TurboFLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 1994; 193:777-781.
6. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999; 211:101-110.
7. Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E. Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 1999; 213:881-888.
8. Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 2001; 220:13-30.
9. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Patterns of peripheral enhancement in breast masses: correlation of findings on contrast medium enhanced MRI with histologic features and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21: 421-430.
10. Matsubayashi R, Matsuo Y, Edakuni G, Satoh T, Tokunaga O, Kudo S. Breast masses with peripheral rim enhancement on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: correlation of MR findings with histologic features and expression of growth factors. Radiology 2000; 217:841-848.
11. Kuwada T, Tozaki M, Harada J. [Evaluation of enhancement patterns using three-dimensional dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in 209 cases of breast cancer]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2004; 64:544-551. (Article in Japanese)
12. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1996; 200:639-649.
13. Stomper PC, Winston JS, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Arredondo MA, Blumenson LE. Angiogenesis and dynamic MR imaging gadolinium enhancement of malignant and benign breast lesions. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 45:39-46.
14. Turetschek K, Huber S, Floyd E, et al. MR imaging characterization of microvessels in experimental breast tumors by using a particulate contrast agent with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 2001; 218:562-569.
15. Su MY, Cheung YC, Fruehauf JP, et al. Correlation of dynamic contrast enhancement MRI parameters with microvessel density and VEGF for assessment of angiogenesis in breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 18:467-477.
16. Tozaki M, Toi M, Miyamoto Y, Fukuda K. Power Doppler sonography of breast masses: correlation of Doppler spectral parameters with tumor angiogenesis and histologic growth pattern. J Ultrasound Med 2000; 19:593-600.
17. World Health Organization classification of tumors. Pathology and genetics of tumours of the breast and female genital organs. Lyon, France: IARC, 2003.
18. Japanese Breast Cancer Society. General rules for clinical and pathological recording of breast cancer, 14th ed. Tokyo, Japan: Kanehara, 2000.
19. Kitagawa K, Sakuma H, Ishida N, Hirano T, Ishihara A, Takeda K. Contrast-enhanced highresolution MRI of invasive breast cancer: correlation with histopathologic subtypes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1805-1809.
20. Tozaki M, Hayashi N, Miyamoto Y, Fukuda Y, Fukuda K. [Power Doppler US in breast masses: correlation of spectral analysis findings with pathological features]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1999; 59:860-866. (Article in Japanese)
21. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG. Update of breast MR imaging architectural interpretation model. Radiology 2001; 219:484-494.
22. Kim SJ, Morris EA, Liberman L, et al. Observer variability and applicability of BI-RADS terminology for breast MR imaging: invasive carcinomas as focal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177: 551-557.
23. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:171-178.
24. Sherif H, Mahfouz AE, Oellinger H, et al. Peripheral washout sign on contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast. Radiology 1997; 205:209-213.
25. American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS), 4th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003.
26. Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Matsushima S, Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MR imaging of focal breast masses: interpretation model based on kinetic and morphological parameters. RadiatMed 2005; 23:43-50.
27. Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR, Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis-correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1991; 324:1-8.
28. 2* susceptibility-contrast, first-pass perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 202:87-95.
29. 2*-weighted first-pass perfusion MR imaging. Radiology 2000; 216:545-553.
30. Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Garrido L. Breast cancer: regional blood flow and blood volume measured with magnetic susceptibility-based MR imaging-initial results. Radiology 2002; 223:558-565.
31. Tozaki M, Fukuda Y, Fukuda K. [Multi-section magnetic susceptibility perfusion echo-planar imaging of the breast]. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 2003; 63:214-220. (Article in Japanese)
32. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Dynamic MR imaging of invasive breast cancer: correlation with tumour grade and other histological factors. Br J Radiol 1997; 70:446-451.
33. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Tot T, Bone B. Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 2003; 13:2425-2435.
34. Sardanelli F, Rescinito G, Giordano GD, Calabrese M, Parodi RC. MR dynamic enhancement of breast lesions: high temporal resolution during the first-minute versus eight-minute study. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000; 24:724-731.
35. Kuhl CK, Schild HH, Morakkabati N. Dynamic bilateral contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: trade-off between spatial and temporal resolution. Radiology 2005; 236:789-800.