Correlation between high resolution dynamic MR features and prognostic factors in breast cancer

Korean Journal of Radiology

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 10-18

  Shin, Ho Lee ^a   Cho, Nariya ^a   Seung, Ja Kim ^a   Joo, Hee Cha ^b   Kyung, Soo Cho ^a   Eun, Sook Ko ^a   Woo, Kyung Moon ^a  

^a Seoul National University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University Boramae Hospital   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Breast, MR; Prognostic factors

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER INVASION; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LOGISTIC MODELS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; PROGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 39449122683     PISSN: 12296929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2008.9.1.10     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, Leutner C, Wardelmann E, Gieseke J, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999;211:101-110
2. Orel SG. Differentiating benign from malignant enhancing lesions identified at MR imaging of the breast: are time-signal intensity curves an accurate predictor? Radiology 1999;211:5-7
3. Mussurakis S, Gibbs P, Horsman A. Peripheral enhancement and spatial contrast uptake heterogeneity of primary breast tumors: quantitative assessment with dynamic MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998;22:35-46
4. Szabó 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
5. Jinguji J, Kajiya Y, Kamimura K, Nakajo M, Sagara Y, Takahama T, et al. Rim enhancement of breast cancers on contrast-enhanced MR imaging: relationship with prognostic factors. Breast Cancer 2006;13:64-73
6. Teifke A, Behr O, Schmidt M, Victor A, Vomweg TW, Thelen M, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of breast lesions: correlation with microvessel distribution pattern and histologic characteristics of prognosis. Radiology 2006;239:351-360
7. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Dynamic MR imaging of invasive breast cancer: correlation with tumor grade and other histologic factors. Br J Radiol 1997;70:446-451
8. Bone B, Aspelin P, Bronge L, Veress B. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging as a prognostic indicator of breast cancer. Acta Radiol 1998;39:279-284
9. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Winston JS, Edge SB, Arredondo MA, et al. Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 1995;197:387-395
10. Fischer U, Kopka L, Brinck U, Korabiowska M, Schauer A, Grabbe E. Prognostic value of contrast-enhanced MR mammography in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 1997;7:1002-1005
11. Tuncbilek N, Karakas HM, Okten OO. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in determining histopathological prognostic factors of invasive breast cancers. Eur J Radiol 2005;53:199-205
12. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System- Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 1st ed. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2003
13. Lee SH, Cho N, Chung HK, Kim SJ, Cha JH, Cho KS, et al. Breast MR imaging: correlation of high resolution dynamic MR findings with prognostic factors. J Korean Radiol Soc 2005;52:355-361(Korean)
14. Elston CW, Ellis IO, Pinder SE. Pathologic prognostic factors in breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 1999;31:209-223
15. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 1991;19:403-410
16. Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA. Solid breast nodule: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995;196:123-134
17. Stavros AT. Malignant solid breast nodules: specific type. In: Stavros AT, ed. Breast ultrasound, 1st ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2004:597-688
18. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, Hashiguchi N, Sakai S, Masuda K, et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1996;200:639-649
19. Buckley DL, Drew PJ, Mussurakis S, Monson JR, Horsman A. Microvessel density of invasive breast cancer assessed by dynamic Gd-DTPA enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7:461-464
20. 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
21. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Winston JS, Budnick RM, Stewart CC. Invasive breast carcinoma: analysis of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging enhancement features and cell proliferative activity determined by DNA S-phase percentage. Cancer 1996;77:1844-1849
22. Heywang-Kobrunner SH. Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 1994;29:94-104