Using Lesion Washout Volume Fraction As a Biomarker to Improve Suspicious Breast Lesion Characterization

Overview

Journal J Appl Clin Med Phys

Specialties Biophysics
General Medicine

Date 2015 Dec 25

PMID 26699291

Authors

Jie Huang

Sarah M Schafer

Gerald R Aben

Lori A Hoisington

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate using lesion washout (WO) volume fraction as a biomarker to improve the characterization of suspicious breast lesions. Study lesions consisted of a total of 60 malignant tumors (BI-RADS 6) and 62 suspicious lesions (BI-RADS 4 or 5). The biopsies of these suspicious lesions resulted in a total of 30 malignant tumors and 32 benign lesions, respectively, yielding a 48.4% positive predictive value (PPV) of the biopsies. The mean and standard deviation of the lesion WO volume fraction of these 60 BI-RADS 6 malignant tumors were first computed to establish a 99% sensitivity threshold value for malignant tumors, and then the biomarker was used to characterize the suspicious lesions. Using the biomarker would characterize all the malignant tumors as malignant, 12 out of the 32 benign lesions as benign, potentially resulting in a 24% improvement rate in the PPV of the biopsies (from 48.4% to 60%) and consequently a 22.5% reduction rate in the false-positive rate of benign biopsies (from 51.6% to 40%). The lesion WO volume fraction biomarker could improve the computer-based assessment of breast MRI by increasing the PPV of breast biopsies and reducing the number of unnecessary biopsies without compromising sensitivity.

References

Kuhl C, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, Leutner C, Wardelmann E, Gieseke J . Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions?. Radiology. 1999; 211(1):101-10. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.211.1.r99ap38101. View

Orel S . Differentiating benign from malignant enhancing lesions identified at MR imaging of the breast: are time-signal intensity curves an accurate predictor?. Radiology. 1999; 211(1):5-7. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.211.1.r99ap395. View

Su M, Cheung Y, Fruehauf J, Yu H, Nalcioglu O, Mechetner E . Correlation of dynamic contrast enhancement MRI parameters with microvessel density and VEGF for assessment of angiogenesis in breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003; 18(4):467-77. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.10380. View

Wang L, DeMartini W, Partridge S, Peacock S, Lehman C . MRI-detected suspicious breast lesions: predictive values of kinetic features measured by computer-aided evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009; 193(3):826-31. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.08.1335. View

Huang J, Hahn T, Hoisington L, Schafer S, Zong X, Berger K . Improving suspicious breast lesion characterization using semi-automatic lesion fractional volume washout kinetic analysis. Med Phys. 2011; 38(11):5998-6009. DOI: 10.1118/1.3651635. View

Morris E . Breast MR imaging lexicon updated. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2006; 14(3):293-303, v. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2006.07.001. View

Stomper P, Herman S, Klippenstein D, Winston J, Edge S, Arredondo M . Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology. 1995; 197(2):387-95. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.197.2.7480682. View

Buadu L, Murakami J, Murayama S, Hashiguchi N, Sakai S, Masuda K . Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology. 1996; 200(3):639-49. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.200.3.8756909. View

Carmeliet P, Jain R . Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature. 2000; 407(6801):249-57. DOI: 10.1038/35025220. View

10.

Orel S, SCHNALL M, Livolsi V, Troupin R . Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology. 1994; 190(2):485-93. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.190.2.8284404. View

11.

Schnall M, Blume J, Bluemke D, DeAngelis G, DeBruhl N, Harms S . Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology. 2005; 238(1):42-53. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2381042117. View

12.

Bluemke D, Gatsonis C, Chen M, DeAngelis G, DeBruhl N, Harms S . Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy. JAMA. 2004; 292(22):2735-42. DOI: 10.1001/jama.292.22.2735. View