Computer-aided interpretation of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging reflects histopathology of invasive breast cancer

European Radiology

Volumn 20, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 1563-1571

  Baltzer, Pascal A T ^a   Vag, Tibor ^a   Dietzel, Matthias ^a   Beger, Sebastian ^a   Freiberg, Christian ^a   Gajda, Mieczyslaw ^a   Camara, Oumar ^a   Kaiser, Werner A ^a  

^a FRIEDRICH SCHILLER UNIVERSITY JENA   (Germany)

Author keywords

Breast; Computer assisted diagnosis; DCE MRI; MRI; Neoplasm

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER INVASION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; KINETICS; LYMPH NODE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TUMOR INVASION; TUMOR VOLUME;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; PROGNOSIS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TUMOR BURDEN;

EID: 77954819846     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1722-x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Bone B, Aspelin P, Bronge L et al (1996) Sensitivity and specificity of MR mammography with histopathological correlation in 250 breasts. Acta Radiol 37:208-213
2. Drew PJ, Chatterjee S, Turnbull LW et al (1999) Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast is superior to triple assessment for the pre-operative detection of multifocal breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 6:599-603
3. Kaiser WA, Zeitler E (1989) MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 170:681-686
4. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL et al (1995) Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 197:387-395
5. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830-849
6. Fischer DR, Wurdinger S, Boettcher J et al (2005) Further signs in the evaluation of magnetic resonance mammography: a retrospective study. Invest Radiol 40:430-435
7. Kaiser WA (2007) Breast magnetic resonance imaging: principles and techniques. Semin Roentgenol 42:228-235
8. Malich A, Fischer DR, Wurdinger S et al (2005) Potential MRI interpretation model: differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses. AJR 185:964-970
9. Neubauer H, Li M, Kuehne-Heid R et al (2003) High grade and non-high grade ductal carcinoma in situ on dynamic MR mammography: characteristic findings for signal increase and morphological pattern of enhancement. Br J Radiol 76:3-12
10. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A (1997) Dynamic MR imaging of invasive breast cancer: correlation with tumour grade and other histological factors. Br J Radiol 70:446-451
11. Narisada H, Aoki T, Sasaguri T et al (2006) Correlation between numeric gadolinium- enhanced dynamic MRI ratios and prognostic factors and histologic type of breast carcinoma. AJR 187:297-306
12. Tuncbilek N, Karakas HM, Okten OO (2005) Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in determining histopathological prognostic factors of invasive breast cancers. Eur J Radiol 53:199-205
13. Fischer U, Kopka L, Brinck U et al (1997) Prognostic value of contrastenhanced MR mammography in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 7:1002-1005
14. Baltzer PA, Renz DM, Kullnig PE et al (2009) Application of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) in MR-mammography (MRM): do we really need whole lesion time curve distribution analysis? Acad Radiol 16:435-442
15. Contesso G, Mouriesse H, Friedman S et al (1987) The importance of histologic grade in long-term prognosis of breast cancer: a study of 1,010 patients, uniformly treated at the Institut Gustave- Roussy. J Clin Oncol 5:1378-1386
16. Donegan WL (1997) Tumour-related prognostic factors for breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 47:28-51
17. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER et al (1988) Relative worth of oestrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06. J Clin Oncol 6:1076-1087
18. Stewart JF, Rubens RD, Millis RR et al (1983) Steroid receptors and prognosis in operable (stage I and II) breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 19:1381-1387
19. Marks JR, Humphrey PA, Wu K et al (1994) Overexpression of p53 and HER-2/neu proteins as prognostic markers in early stage breast cancer. Ann Surg 219:332-341
20. Folkman J (1971) Tumour angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. New Engl J Med 285:1182-1186
21. Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR et al (1991) Tumour angiogenesis and metastasis- correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. New Engl J Med 324:1-8
22. Tresserra F, Rodriguez I, Garcia-Yuste M et al (2007) Tumour size and lymph node status in multifocal breast cancer. Breast J 13:68-71
23. Chen JH, Baek HM, Nalcioglu O et al (2008) Oestrogen receptor and breast MR imaging features: a correlation study. J Magn Reson Imaging 27:825-833
24. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen Wiberg M et al (2003) Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 13:2425-2435
25. Dent R, Hanna WM, Trudeau M et al (2009) Pattern of metastatic spread in triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 115:423-428
26. Henson DE, Chu KC, Levine PH (2003) Histologic grade, stage, and survival in breast carcinoma: comparison of African American and Caucasian women. Cancer 98:908-917
27. Ignatiadis M, Sotiriou C (2008) Understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade. Pathobiology 75:104-111
28. Longacre TA, Ennis M, Quenneville LA et al (2006) Interobserver agreement and reproducibility in classification of invasive breast carcinoma: an NCI breast cancer family registry study. Mod Pathol 19:195-207
29. Pabst T, Kenn W, Kaiser WA et al (2001) Understanding why contrast enhancement in dynamic MRI is not reproducible: illustration with a simple phantom. Breast J 7:166-170
30. Port RE, Knopp MV, Brix G (2001) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using Gd-DTPA: interindividual variability of the arterial input function and consequences for the assessment of kinetics in tumours. Magn Reson Med 45:1030-1038
31. Zwick S, Brix G, Tofts PS et al (2009) Simulation-based comparison of two approaches frequently used for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1556-6