Evaluation of Kinetic Entropy of Breast Masses Initially Found on MRI using Whole-lesion Curve Distribution Data: Comparison with the Standard Kinetic Analysis

European Radiology

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 2470-2478

  Shimauchi, Akiko ^a,b   Abe, Hiroyuki ^a   Schacht, David V ^a   Yulei, Jian ^a   Pineda, Federico D ^a   Jansen, Sanaz A ^a   Ganesh, Rajiv ^a   Newstead, Gillian M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b TOHOKU UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Breast; Cancer; Computer Assisted; Diagnosis; Imaging; Magnetic resonance imaging

Indexed keywords

GADODIAMIDE; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADENOMATOUS POLYP; ADENOSQUAMOUS CARCINOMA; ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST LESION; BREAST PAPILLOMA; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER SIZE; COMPUTER AIDED EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER SYSTEM; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; ENTROPY; FIBROADENOMA; FIBROCYSTIC BREAST DISEASE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PERCUTANEOUS BIOPSY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION; TUMOR VOLUME; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; KINETICS; MIDDLE AGED; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; ENTROPY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; KINETICS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 84937628760     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: 14321084     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3635-1     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S et al (1999) Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 211:101–110
2. Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA et al (2006) Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 238:42–53
3. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK, Bone B (2003) Dynamic MR imaging of the breast. Analysis of kinetic and morphologic diagnostic criteria. Acta Radiol 44:379–386
4. Wang LC, DeMartini WB, Partridge SC, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) MRI-detected suspicious breast lesions: predictive values of kinetic features measured by computer-aided evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:826–831
5. Jansen SA, Shimauchi A, Zak L et al (2009) Kinetic curves of malignant lesions are not consistent across MRI systems: need for improved standardization of breast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI acquisition. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:832–839
6. Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Kan S et al (2005) ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. Magn Reson Med Sci 4:35–42
7. Partridge SC, Demartini WB, Kurland BF, Eby PR, White SW, Lehman CD (2010) Differential diagnosis of mammographically and clinically occult breast lesions on diffusion-weighted MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 31:562–570
8. Hatakenaka M, Soeda H, Yabuuchi H et al (2008) Apparent diffusion coefficients of breast tumors: clinical application. Magn Reson Med Sci 7:23–29
9. Baltzer PA, Benndorf M, Dietzel M, Gajda M, Camara O, Kaiser WA (2010) Sensitivity and specificity of unenhanced MR mammography (DWI combined with T2-weighted TSE imaging, ueMRM) for the differentiation of mass lesions. Eur Radiol 20:1101–1110
10. Spick C, Pinker-Domenig K, Rudas M, Helbich TH, Baltzer PA (2014) MRI-only lesions: application of diffusion-weighted imaging obviates unnecessary MR-guided breast biopsies. Eur Radiol 24:1204–1210
11. Marini C, Iacconi C, Giannelli M, Cilotti A, Moretti M, Bartolozzi C (2007) Quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesion. Eur Radiol 17:2646–2655
12. Guo Y, Cai YQ, Cai ZL et al (2002) Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 16:172–178
13. Kuhl CK (2000) MRI of breast tumors. Eur Radiol 10:46–58
14. Wedegärtner U, Bick U, Wörtler K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G (2001) Differentiation between benign and malignant findings on MR-mammography: usefulness of morphological criteria. Eur Radiol 11:1645–1650
15. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S et al (1996) Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 200:639–649
16. Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ et al (2000) Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:35–43
17. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Coady AM, Turnbull LW, Horsman A (1996) Observer variability in the interpretation of contrast enhanced MRI of the breast. Br J Radiol 69:1009–1016
18. Pan J, Dogan BE, Carkaci S et al (2013) Comparing performance of the CADstream and the DynaCAD breast MRI CAD systems: CADstream vs. DynaCAD in breast MRI. J Digit Imaging 26:971–976
19. Renz DM, Baltzer PA, Kullnig PE et al (2008) Clinical value of computer-assisted analysis in MR mammography. A comparison between two systems and three observers with different levels of experience. Röfo 180:968–976
20. Liu YH, Xu L, Liu LH et al (2014) 3.0 T MR-CAD: Clinical Value in Diagnosis of Breast Tumor Compared with Conventional MRI. J Cancer 5:585–589
21. Lehman CD, Blume JD, DeMartini WB, Hylton NM, Herman B, Schnall MD (2013) Accuracy and interpretation time of computer-aided detection among novice and experienced breast MRI readers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:W683–W689
22. (2013) ACR BI-RADS: magnetic resonance imaging, 2nd edn. In: ACR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: breast imaging atlas. 5th edn. Reston
23. Lehman CD, Peacock S, DeMartini WB, Chen X (2006) A new automated software system to evaluate breast MR examinations: improved specificity without decreased sensitivity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:51–56
24. Hauth EA, Jaeger HJ, Maderwald S, Muehler A, Kimmig R, Forsting M (2008) Quantitative 2- and 3-dimensional analysis of pharmacokinetic model-derived variables for breast lesions in dynamic, contrast-enhanced MR mammography. Eur J Radiol 66:300–308
25. Chen W, Giger ML, Lan L, Bick U (2004) Computerized interpretation of breast MRI: investigation of enhancement-variance dynamics. Med Phys 31:1076–1082
26. Gilhuijs KG, Deurloo EE, Muller SH, Peterse JL, Schultze Kool LJ (2002) Breast MR imaging in women at increased lifetime risk of breast cancer: clinical system for computerized assessment of breast lesions initial results. Radiology 225:907–916
27. Jansen SA, Fan X, Karczmar GS et al (2008) DCEMRI of breast lesions: is kinetic analysis equally effective for both mass and nonmass-like enhancement? Med Phys 35:3102–3109
28. Newell D, Nie K, Chen JH et al (2010) Selection of diagnostic features on breast MRI to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions using computer-aided diagnosis: differences in lesions presenting as mass and non-mass-like enhancement. Eur Radiol 20:771–781
29. Banik S, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JE (2013) Measures of angular spread and entropy for the detection of architectural distortion in prior mammograms. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 8:121–134
30. Chen W, Giger ML, Newstead GM et al (2010) Computerized assessment of breast lesion malignancy using DCE-MRI robustness study on two independent clinical datasets from two manufacturers. Acad Radiol 17:822–829
31. Kierans AS, Bennett GL, Mussi TC et al (2013) Characterization of malignancy of adnexal lesions using ADC entropy: comparison with mean ADC and qualitative DWI assessment. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:164–171
32. Wang TC, Huang YH, Huang CS et al (2013) Computer-aided diagnosis of breast DCE-MRI using pharmacokinetic model and 3-D morphology analysis. Magn Reson Imaging. doi:10.1016/j.mri.2013.12.002
33. Baltzer PA, Renz DM, Kullnig PE, Gajda M, Camara O, Kaiser WA (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
34. Karahaliou A, Vassiou K, Arikidis NS, Skiadopoulos S, Kanavou T, Costaridou L (2010) Assessing heterogeneity of lesion enhancement kinetics in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer diagnosis. Br J Radiol 83:296–309
35. Preim U, Glaßer S, Preim B, Fischbach F, Ricke J (2012) Computer-aided diagnosis in breast DCE-MRI–quantification of the heterogeneity of breast lesions. Eur J Radiol 81:1532–1538
36. Azlan CA, Di Giovanni P, Ahearn TS, Semple SI, Gilbert FJ, Redpath TW (2010) B1 transmission-field inhomogeneity and enhancement ratio errors in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the breast at 3 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 31:234–239
37. Rahbar H, Partridge SC, Demartini WB, Gutierrez RL, Parsian S, Lehman CD (2012) Improved B1 homogeneity of 3 Tesla breast MRI using dual-source parallel radiofrequency excitation. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:1222–1226
38. Schmidt MA, Borri M, Scurr E et al (2013) Breast dynamic contrast-enhanced examinations with fat suppression: are contrast-agent uptake curves affected by magnetic field inhomogeneity? Eur Radiol 23:1537–1545
39. Kaiser WA, Zeitler E (1989) MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 170:681–686
40. Mussurakis S, Gibbs P, Horsman A (1998) Peripheral enhancement and spatial contrast uptake heterogeneity of primary breast tumours: quantitative assessment with dynamic MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 22:35–46
41. 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
42. Shimauchi A, Jansen SA, Abe H, Jaskowiak N, Schmidt RA, Newstead GM (2010) Breast cancers not detected at MRI: review of false-negative lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1674–1679
43. Schnall MD, Rosten S, Englander S, Orel SG, Nunes LW (2001) A combined architectural and kinetic interpretation model for breast MR images. Acad Radiol 8:591–597
44. Tozaki M (2004) Interpretation of breast MRI: correlation of kinetic and morphological parameters with pathological findings. Magn Reson Med Sci 3:189–197