Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.13104/jksmrm.2013.17.2.73

A Method to Quantify Breast MRI for Predicting Tumor Invasion in Patients with Preoperative Biopsy- Proven Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS)  

Ko, Myung-Su (Health Screening and Promotion Center, Asan Medical Center)
Kim, Sung Hun (Department of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital)
Kang, Bong Joo (Department of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital)
Choi, Byung Gil (Department of Radiology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital)
Song, Byung Joo (Department of General Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
Cha, Eun Suk (Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
Kiraly, Atilla Peter (Siemens Corporation, Corporate Research)
Kim, In Seong (Siemens Ltd.)
Publication Information
Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging / v.17, no.2, 2013 , pp. 73-82 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose : To determine the quantitative parameters of breast MRI that predict tumor invasion in biopsy-proven DCIS. Materials and Methods: From January 2009 to March 2010, 42 MRI examinations of 41 patients with biopsy-proven DCIS were included. The quantitative parameters, which include the initial percentage enhancement ($E_1$), peak percentage enhancement ($E_{peak}$), time to peak enhancement (TTP), signal enhancement ratio (SER), arterial enhancement fraction (AEF), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value, long diameter and the volume of the lesion, were calculated as parameters that might predict invasion. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify the parameters associated with invasion. Results: Out of 42 lesions, 23 lesions were confirmed to be invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and 19 lesions were confirmed to be pure DCIS. Tumor size (p = 0.003; $6.5{\pm}3.2$ cm vs. $3.6{\pm}2.6$ cm, respectively) and SER (p = 0.036; $1.1{\pm}0.3$ vs. $0.9{\pm}0.3$, respectively) showed statistically significant high in IDC. In contrast, E1, Epeak, TTP, ADC, AEF and volume of the lesion were not statistically significant. Tumor size and SER had statistically significant associations with invasion, with an odds ratio of 1.04 and 22.93, respectively. Conclusion: Of quantitative parameters analyzed, SER and the long diameter of the lesion could be specific parameter for predicting invasion in the biopsy-proven DCIS.
Keywords
Magnetic resonance imaging; Carcinoma in situ; Quantitative parameter;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Huang YT, Cheung YC, Lo YF, Ueng SH, Kuo WL, Chen SC. MRI findings of cancers preoperatively diagnosed as pure DCIS at core needle biopsy. Acta Radiol 2011;52:1064-1068   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Lee JW, Han W, Ko E, et al. Sonographic lesion size of ductal carcinoma in situ as a preoperative predictor for the presence of an invasive focus. J Surg Oncol 2008;98:15-20   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Leikola J, Heikkila P, Pamilo M, Salmenkivi K, Von Smitten K, Leidenius M. Predicting invasion in patients with DCIS in the preoperative percutaneous biopsy. Acta Oncol 2007;46:798-802   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Wang LC, DeMartini WB, Partridge SC, Peacock S, Lehman CD. MRI-detected suspicious breast lesions: predictive values of kinetic features measured by computer-aided evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:826-831   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Macura KJ, Ouwerkerk R, Jacobs MA, Bluemke DA. Patterns of enhancement on breast MR images: interpretation and imaging pitfalls. Radiographics 2006;26:1719-34; quiz   DOI
6 Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK, Bone B. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast. Analysis of kinetic and morphologic diagnostic criteria. Acta Radiol 2003;44:379-386
7 Schnall MD. Breast MR imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 2003; 41:43-50   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Morris EA. Breast cancer imaging with MRI. Radiol Clin North Am 2002;40:443-466   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Leonard GD, Swain SM. Ductal carcinoma in situ, complexities and challenges. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:906-920   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004;233:830-849   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Hylton N. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: opportunities to improve breast cancer management. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:1678-1684   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Vieira CC, Mercado CL, Cangiarella JF, Moy L, Toth HK, Guth AA. Microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ: clinical presentation, imaging features, pathologic findings, and outcome. Eur J Radiol 2010;73:102-107   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Hua X, Yu L, Huang X, Liao Z, Xian Q. Expression and role of fibroblast activation protein-alpha in microinvasive breast carcinoma. Diagnostic Pathology 2011;6:111   DOI
14 Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy of nonpalpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates. Radiology 2001;218:497-502   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Li KL, Partridge SC, Joe BN, et al. Invasive breast cancer: predicting disease recurrence by using high-spatial-resolution signal enhancement ratio imaging. Radiology 2008;248:79-87   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ, et al. Dynamic high-spatialresolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:35-43   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Jiang Y, Nishikawa RM, Schmidt RA, Metz CE, Giger ML, Doi K. Improving breast cancer diagnosis with computer-aided diagnosis. Acad Radiol 1999;6:22-33   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Edge S, Byrd D, Compton C, 1, 2, 3, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7 ed. New York: Springer; 2010
19 Esserman L, Hylton N, George T, Weidner N. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to assess tumor histopathology and angiogenesis in breast carcinoma. Breast J 1999;5:13-21   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Grady L. Random walks for image segmentation. T-PAMI 2006; 6:469-475
21 Baltzer PA, Vag T, Dietzel M, et al. Computer-aided interpretation of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging reflects histopathology of invasive breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2010;20: 1563-1571   DOI
22 Kaiser WA, Zeitler E. MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 1989;170:681-686   DOI
23 Jansen SA, Shimauchi A, Zak L, et al. Kinetic curves of malignant lesions are not consistent across MRI systems: need for improved standardization of breast dynamic contrastenhanced MRI acquisition. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193: 832-839   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Santinelli A, Baccarini M, Colanzi P, Fabris G. Microvessel quantitation in intraductal and early invasive breast carcinomas. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 2000;22:277-284
25 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   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Kim JA, Son EJ, Youk JH, et al. MRI findings of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: kinetic characteristics compared according to lesion type and histopathologic factors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:1450-1456   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Ernster VL, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE, et al. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1546-1554   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Practice guideline for the management of ductal carcinoma insitu of the breast (DCIS). J Am Coll Surg 2007;205:145-161   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Hoorntje LE, Schipper ME, Peeters PH, Bellot F, Storm RK, Borel Rinkes IH. The finding of invasive cancer after a preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma-in-situ: causes of ductal carcinoma-in-situ underestimates with stereotactic 14-gauge needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:748-753   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Yen TW, Hunt KK, Ross MI, et al. Predictors of invasive breast cancer in patients with an initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: a guide to selective use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in management of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 200:516-526   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Dillon MF, McDermott EW, Quinn CM, O'Doherty A, O'Higgins N, Hill AD. Predictors of invasive disease in breast cancer when core biopsy demonstrates DCIS only. J Surg Oncol 2006;93:559-563   DOI   ScienceOn
32 Bhooshan N, Giger ML, Jansen SA, Li H, Lan L, Newstead GM. Cancerous breast lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: computerized characterization for image-based prognostic markers. Radiology 2010;254:680-690   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Schouten van der Velden AP, Schlooz-Vries MS, Boetes C, Wobbes T. Magnetic resonance imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ: what is its clinical application? A review. Am J Surg 2009; 198:262-269   DOI   ScienceOn
34 Chen W, Giger ML, Li H, Bick U, Newstead GM. Volumetric texture analysis of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:562-571   DOI   ScienceOn