Interobserver variability between breast imagers using the fifth edition of the BI-RADS MRI lexicon

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 204, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 1120-1124

  Grimm, Lars J ^a   Anderson, Andy L ^a   Baker, Jay A ^a   Johnson, Karen S ^a   Walsh, Ruth ^a   Yoon, Sora C ^a   Ghate, Sujata V ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

BI RADS; Breast cancer; Interobserver variability; Probably benign

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST IMAGING; BREAST LESION; BREAST TUMOR; CLINICAL FEATURE; CLINICAL INDICATOR; DISEASE SEVERITY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGING AND DISPLAY; INTEROBSERVER VARIABILITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; SYNDROME DELINEATION; TUMOR VOLUME; ANALOGS AND DERIVATIVES; BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSTIC USE; FEMALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOBENIC ACID; MEGLUMINE; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUND;

BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MEGLUMINE; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORGANOMETALLIC COMPOUNDS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84934325139     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.14.13047     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Burnside ES, Sickles EA, Bassett LW, et al. The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history. J Am Coll Radiol 2009; 6:851-860
2. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1992
3. D'Orsi CJ, Kopans DB. Mammography interpretation: the BI-RADS method. Am Fam Physician 1997; 55:1548-1550
4. 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. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS-breast imaging atlas. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
5. Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH, et al. ACR BI-RADS magnetic resonance imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2013
6. Edwards SD, Lipson JA, Ikeda DM, Lee JM. Updates and revisions to the BI-RADS magnetic resonance imaging lexicon. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2013; 21:483-493
7. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991; 179:463-468
8. Grimm LJ, Anderson AL, Baker JA, Johnson KS, Walsh R, Yoon SC, Ghate SV. Frequency of malignancy and imaging characteristics of probably benign lesions seen on breast MRI. AJR. Accepted for publication.
9. Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 2005; 37:360-363
10. 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 2001; 177:551-557
11. Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ, et al. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR 2000; 175:35-43
12. Warren R, Hayes C, Pointon L, et al. A test of performance of breast MRI interpretation in a multicentre screening study. Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 24:917-929
13. Moraes Pde C, Chala LF, Chang YS, et al. Observer variability in the application of morphologic and dynamic criteria according to the BI-RADS for MRI. Breast J 2010; 16:558-560
14. Stoutjesdijk MJ, Futterer JJ, Boetes C, van Die LE, Jager G, Barentsz JO. Variability in the description of morphologic and contrast enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 2005; 40:355-362
15. 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 followup. AJR 2011; 196:218-224
16. Hansen NL, Kuhl CK, Barabasch A, Strobel K, Schrading S. Does MRI breast "density" (degree of background enhancement) correlate with mammographic breast density? J Magn Reson Imaging 2014; 40:483-489
17. Berg WA, Campassi C, Langenberg P, Sexton MJ. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: interand intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment. AJR 2000; 174:1769-1777
18. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Apruzzese A, et al. Categorizing breast mammographic density: intraand interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories. Breast 2005; 14:269-275
19. Ooms EA, Zonderland HM, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Mammography: interobserver variability in breast density assessment. Breast 2007; 16:568-576
20. Mahoney MC, Gatsonis C, Hanna L, DeMartini WB, Lehman C. Positive predictive value of BI-RADS MR imaging. Radiology 2012; 264:51-58
21. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR 2002; 179:171-178
22. 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 2009; 193:994-1000
23. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG. Update of breast MR imaging architectural interpretation model. Radiology 2001; 219:484-494
24. Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA, et al. Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 2006; 238:42-53
25. 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 2006; 187:313-321
26. Sakamoto N, Tozaki M, Higa K, et al. Categorization of non-mass-like breast lesions detected by MRI. Breast Cancer 2008; 15:241-246
27. Bluemke DA, Gatsonis CA, Chen MH, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy. JAMA 2004; 292:2735-2742
28. 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
29. Sadowski EA, Kelcz F. Frequency of malignancy in lesions classified as probably benign after dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI examination. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21:556-564
30. Eby PR, Demartini WB, Peacock S, Rosen EL, Lauro B, Lehman CD. Cancer yield of probably benign breast MR examinations. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 26:950-955
31. Hauth E, Umutlu L, Kummel S, Kimmig R, Forsting M. Follow-up of probably benign lesions (BI-RADS 3 category) in breast MR imaging. Breast J 2010; 16:297-304
32. Hartman AR, Daniel BL, Kurian AW, et al. Breast magnetic resonance image screening and ductal lavage in women at high genetic risk for breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 100:479-489
33. Eby PR, DeMartini WB, Gutierrez RL, Saini MH, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Characteristics of probably benign breast MRI lesions. AJR 2009; 193:861-867
34. Liberman L, Morris EA, Benton CL, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD. Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience in high-risk women. Cancer 2003; 98:377-388
35. Weinstein SP, Hanna LG, Gatsonis C, Schnall MD, Rosen MA, Lehman CD. Frequency of malignancy seen in probably benign lesions at contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging: findings from ACRIN 6667. Radiology 2010; 255:731-737