Double reading of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer detection

被引:42
|
作者
Rotili, Anna [1 ]
Trimboli, Rubina Manuela [2 ]
Penco, Silvia [1 ]
Pesapane, Filippo [1 ,3 ]
Tantrige, Priyan [4 ]
Cassano, Enrico [1 ]
Sardanelli, Francesco [2 ,5 ]
机构
[1] European Inst Oncol IRCCS, IEO, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti, 435, I-20141 Milan, Italy
[2] Univ Milan, Dept BioMed Sci Hlth, Via Morandi 30, I-20097 Milan, Italy
[3] Univ Milan, Postgraduat Sch Radiodiagnost, Via Festa Perdono 7, I-20122 Milan, Italy
[4] Kings Coll Hosp London, Unit Radiol, Denmark Hill, London, Brixton, England
[5] Unit Radiol, IRCCS Policlin San Donato, Via Morandi 30, I-20097 Milan, Italy
关键词
Breast neoplasms; Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Early detection of cancer; Observer variation; Sensitivity and specificity; PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER COHORT; FAMILIAL RISK; DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE; DUCTAL CARCINOMA; IN-SITU; MRI; WOMEN; MAMMOGRAPHY; LESIONS; RECOMMENDATIONS;
D O I
10.1007/s10549-019-05519-y
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose To estimate the performance of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for breast cancer detection. Methods Consecutive breast magnetic resonance imaging examinations performed from January to September 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Examinations performed before/after neoadjuvant therapy, lacking DWI sequences or reference standard were excluded; breasts after mastectomy were also excluded. Two experienced breast radiologists (R1, R2) independently evaluated only DWI. Final pathology or > 1-year follow-up served as reference standard. Mc Nemar, chi(2), and kappa statistics were applied. Results Of 1,131 examinations, 672 (59.4%) lacked DWI sequence, 41 (3.6%) had no reference standard, 30 (2.7%) were performed before/after neoadjuvant therapy, and 10 (0.9%) had undergone bilateral mastectomy. Thus, 378 women aged 49 +/- 11 years (mean +/- standard deviation) were included, 51 (13%) with unilateral mastectomy, totaling 705 breasts. Per-breast cancer prevalence was 96/705 (13.6%). Per-breast sensitivity was 83/96 (87%, 95% confidence interval 78-93%) for both R1 and R2, 89/96 (93%, 86-97%) for double reading (DR) (p = 0.031); per-lesion DR sensitivity for cancers <= 10 mm was 22/31 (71%, 52-86%). Per-breast specificity was 562/609 (93%, 90-94%) for R1, 538/609 (88%, 86-91%) for R2, and 526/609 (86%, 83-89%) for DR (p < 0.001). Inter-observer agreement was substantial (kappa = 0.736). Acquisition time varied from 3:00 to 6:22 min:s. Per-patient median interpretation time was 46 s (R1) and 51 s (R2). Conclusions DR DWI showed a 93% sensitivity and 88% specificity, with 71% sensitivity for cancers <= 10 mm, pointing out a potential for DWI as stand-alone screening method.
引用
收藏
页码:111 / 120
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Double reading of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer detection
    Anna Rotili
    Rubina Manuela Trimboli
    Silvia Penco
    Filippo Pesapane
    Priyan Tantrige
    Enrico Cassano
    Francesco Sardanelli
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2020, 180 : 111 - 120
  • [2] Comparison of breast cancer detection by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and mammography
    Yoshikawa M.I.
    Ohsumi S.
    Sugata S.
    Kataoka M.
    Takashima S.
    Kikuchi K.
    Mochizuki T.
    Radiation Medicine, 2007, 25 (5): : 218 - 223
  • [3] Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Diffusion-Weighted Imaging
    Brandao, Alice C.
    Lehman, Constance D.
    Partridge, Savannah C.
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2013, 21 (02) : 321 - +
  • [4] Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of thyroid cancer
    Ekinci, Ozgur
    Boluk, Sumeyra Emine
    Eren, Tunc
    Ozemir, Ibrahim Ali
    Boluk, Salih
    Salmaslioglu, Artur
    Leblebici, Metin
    Alimoglu, Orhan
    CIRUGIA ESPANOLA, 2018, 96 (10): : 620 - 626
  • [5] DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING IN THE DETECTION OF SACROILIITIS
    Saad, N.
    Bradbury, L.
    McFarlane, J.
    Hollis, K.
    Brown, M.
    Robinson, P.
    INTERNAL MEDICINE JOURNAL, 2012, 42 : 18 - 18
  • [6] Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Pelvic Cancer
    deSouza, N. M.
    Kyriazi, S.
    Sala, E.
    CURRENT MEDICAL IMAGING REVIEWS, 2012, 8 (02) : 92 - 99
  • [7] Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in colorectal cancer
    Barral, M.
    Eveno, C.
    Hoeffel, C.
    Boudiaf, M.
    Bazeries, P.
    Foucher, R.
    Pocard, M.
    Dohan, A.
    Soyer, P.
    JOURNAL OF VISCERAL SURGERY, 2016, 153 (05) : 361 - 369
  • [8] Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging
    Mukherji, SK
    Chenevert, TL
    Castillo, M
    JOURNAL OF NEURO-OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2002, 22 (02) : 118 - 122
  • [9] Diagnostic value of synthetic diffusion-weighted imaging on breast magnetic resonance imaging assessment: comparison with conventional diffusion-weighted imaging
    Yilmaz, Ebru
    Guldogan, Nilgun
    Ulus, Sila
    Turk, Ebru Banu
    Misir, Mustafa Enes
    Arslan, Aydan
    Aribal, Mustafa Erkin
    DIAGNOSTIC AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY, 2024, 30 (02): : 91 - 98
  • [10] Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Uterine Cervical Cancer
    Liu, Ying
    Bai, Renju
    Sun, Haoran
    Liu, Haidong
    Wang, Dehua
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 2009, 33 (06) : 858 - 862