Patterns of nonmasslike enhancement at screening breast MR imaging of high-risk premenopausal women

Radiographics

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1343-1360

  Giess, Catherine S ^a   Raza, Sughra ^a   Birdwell, Robyn L ^a  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREMENOPAUSE; REPRODUCIBILITY; RISK FACTOR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; PREMENOPAUSE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84884408620     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.335125185     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Kuhl CK, Schmutzler RK, Leutner CC, et al. Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology 2000;215(1):267-279.
2. Warner E, Plewes DB, Shumak RS, et al. Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19(15):3524-3531.
3. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mam-mography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23(33):8469-8476.
4. Trecate G, Vergnaghi D, Manoukian S, et al. MRI in the early detection of breast cancer in women with high genetic risk. Tumori 2006;92(6):517-523.
5. Lehman CD, Isaacs C, Schnall MD, et al. Cancer yield of mammography, MR, and US in high-risk women: prospective multi-institution breast cancer screening study. Radiology 2007;244(2):381-388.
6. Sardanelli F, Podo F, D'Agnolo G, et al. Multi-center comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 2007;242(3):698-715.
7. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 2007;57(2):75-89.
8. Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. 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 2010;7(1):18-27.
9. Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kuhl CK, et al. BI-RADS: magnetic resonance imaging, 1st ed. In: D'Orsi CJ, Mendelson EB, Ikeda DM, et al, eds. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS- breast imaging atlas. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2003; 1-114.
10. Birdwell RL, Raza S, Odulate AS. NMLE: diffuse, background enhancement. In: Raza S, Birdwell RL, Ritner JA, et al, eds. Specialty imaging: breast MRI-a comprehensive imaging guide. Salt Lake City, Utah: Amirsys, 2010; II-3-84-II-3-99.
11. Kuhl CK, Bieling HB, Gieseke J, et al. Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical-phase dependency. Radiology 1997;203(1):137-144.
12. Müller-Schimpfe M, Ohmenhaüser K, Stoll P, Dietz K, Claussen CD. Menstrual cycle and age: infuence on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 1997;203(1):145-149.
13. Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Gar-rido L. Physiologic changes in breast magnetic resonance imaging during the menstrual cycle: per-fusion imaging, signal enhancement, and infuence of the T1 relaxation time of breast tissue. Breast J 2005;11(4):236-241.
14. Rieber A, Nüssle K, Merkle E, Kreienberg R, Tom-czak R, Brambs HJ. MR mammography: infuence of menstrual cycle on the dynamic contrast enhancement of fbrocystic disease. Eur Radiol 1999; 9(6):1107-1112.
15. Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging: I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 2007;244(2):356-378.
16. Agrawal G, Su MY, Nalcioglu O, Feig SA, Chen JH. Signifcance of breast lesion descriptors in the ACR BI-RADS MRI lexicon. Cancer 2009;115(7): 1363-1380.
17. Hambly NM, Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Brennan S, Morris EA. Background parenchymal enhancement on baseline screening breast MRI: impact on biopsy rate and short-interval follow-up. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196(1):218-224.
18. Abramovici G, Mainiero MB. Screening breast MR imaging: comparison of interpretation of baseline and annual follow-up studies. Radiology 2011;259 (1):85-91.
19. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJY, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179(1):171-178.
20. Tozaki M, Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-masslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BI-RADS MRI descriptors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187(2):330-337.
21. Tozaki M, Igarashi T, Fukuda K. Breast MRI using the VIBE sequence: clustered ring enhancement in the differential diagnosis of lesions showing non-masslike enhancement. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187(2):313-321.
22. Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA, et al. Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 2006;238(1):42-53.
23. Gutierrez RL, DeMartini WB, Eby PR, Kurland BF, Peacock S, Lehman CD. BI-RADS lesion characteristics predict likelihood of malignancy in breast MRI for masses but not for nonmasslike enhancement. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193 (4):994-1000.
24. Baltzer PAT, Benndorf M, Dietzel M, Gajda M, Runnebaum IB, Kaiser WA. False-positive fnd-ings at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: a BI-RADS descriptor study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194 (6):1658-1663.
25. Mahoney MC, Gatsonis C, Hanna L, DeMartini WB, Lehman C. Positive predictive value of BI-RADS MR imaging. Radiology 2012;264(1):51-58.
26. Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kinkel K, et al. Development, standardization, and testing of a lexicon for reporting contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging studies. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13(6):889-895.
27. Raza S, Vallejo M, Chikarmane SA, Birdwell RL. Pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a range of MRI features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191(3):689-699.
28. Jansen SA, Newstead GM, Abe H, Shimauchi A, Schmidt RA, Karczmar GS. Pure ductal carcinoma in situ: kinetic and morphologic MR characteristics compared with mammographic appearance and nuclear grade. Radiology 2007;245(3):684-691.
29. Yeh ED, Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Talele A, Mon-ticciolo D, Kopans DB. Invasive lobular carcinoma: spectrum of enhancement and morphology on magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2003;9(1): 13-18.
30. Lopez JK, Bassett LW. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: spectrum of mammographic, US, and MR imaging fndings. RadioGraphics 2009;29(1): 165-176.
31. Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C. MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008;107(1):1-14.
32. Chen JH, Baek HM, Nalcioglu O, Su MY. Estrogen receptor and breast MR imaging features: a correlation study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;27 (4):825-833.
33. Bartella L, Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. Nonpalpable mammographically occult invasive breast cancers detected by MRI. AJR Am J Roent-genol 2006;186(3):865-870.
34. Schrading S, Kuhl CK. Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology 2008;246(1):58-70.
35. Thomassin-Naggara I, Trop I, Chopier J, et al. Nonmasslike enhancement at breast MR imaging: the added value of mammography and US for lesion categorization. Radiology 2011;261(1):69-79.
36. Millet I, Pages E, Hoa D, et al. Pearls and pitfalls in breast MRI. Br J Radiol 2012;85(1011):197-207.
37. Chen JH, Liu H, Baek HM, Nalcioglu O, Su MY. Magnetic resonance imaging features of fbrocystic change of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 26(9):1207-1214.
38. Thomassin-Naggara I, Salem C, Darai E, et al. Non-masslike enhancement on breast MRI: interpretation pearls [in French]. J Radiol 2009;90 (3 pt 1): 269-275.
39. Lindfors KK, O'Connor J, Acredolo CR, Liston SE. Short-interval follow-up mammography versus immediate core biopsy of benign breast lesions: assessment of patient stress. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171(1):55-58.
40. Brenner RJ, Sickles EA. Surveillance mammogra-phy and stereotactic core breast biopsy for probably benign lesions: a cost comparison analysis. Acad Radiol 1997;4(6):419-425.
41. Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Miglioretti DL, et al. Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97(5):358-367.