Segmental enhancement on breast MR images: differential diagnosis and diagnostic strategy

Characteristics of Suspicious Breast Lesions Visible Only on MR Imaging: Is It Possible to Classify into Immediate Biopsy and Careful Observation Groups?

PURPOSE

To investigate the characteristics of suspicious MRI-only visible lesions and to explore the validity of subcategorizing these lesions into the following two groups: lesions that would require immediate biopsy (4Bi) and lesions for which careful clinical follow-up could be recommended (4Fo).

METHODS

A retrospective review of 108 MRI-only visible lesions in 106 patients who were diagnosed as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4 between June 2018 and June 2022 at our institution was performed by two radiologists. The breast MR images were evaluated according to BI-RADS and additional MRI descriptors (linear ductal, branching, and apparent diffusion coefficient values). The lesions were categorized by previously reported classification systems, and the positive predictive values (PPVs) for the different categories were determined and compared. Subsequently, a new classification system was developed in this study.

RESULTS

The total malignancy rate was 31% (34/108). No significant differences between benign and malignant lesions were identified for focus and mass lesions. For non-mass lesions, linear ductal and heterogeneous internal enhancement suggested a benign lesion (P = 0.0013 and P = 0.023, respectively), and branching internal enhancement suggested malignancy (P = 0.0066). Segmental distribution suggested malignancy (P = 0.0097). However, the PPV of segmental distribution with heterogeneous enhancement was significantly lower than that of category 4 segmental lesions with other enhancement patterns (11% vs. 59%; P = 0.0198).As a new classification, the distribution of focal, linear, and segmental was given a score of 0, 1, or 2, and the internal enhancement of heterogeneous, linear-ductal, clumped, branching, and clustered-ring enhancement was given a score of 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. When categorized using a scoring system, a statistically significant difference in PPV was observed between 4Fo (n = 27) and 4Bi (n = 33) (7% vs. 61%, P = 0.000029).

CONCLUSION

The new classification system was found to be highly capable of subcategorizing BI-RADS category 4 MRI-only visible non-mass lesions into 4Fo and 4Bi.

Role of breast MRI BI-RADS descriptors in discrimination of non-mass enhancement lesion: A systematic review & meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the association of BI-RADS 5th edition distribution and type of enhancement descriptors with the malignancy of non-mass enhancement (NME) lesions.

METHODS

Medline via PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and Embase databases were systematically searched from January 2013 to July 2022 for original studies, written in English, reporting the positive predictive value (PPV) of individual BI-RADS 5th edition descriptors (distribution and type of enhancement) of NME lesions. Risk of bias and quality of included studies were assessed by QUADAS 2 appraisal tool. Odds ratio (OR) of pathologically confirmed malignant results in each distribution and internal enhancement were pooled in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight studies for a total of 1095 lesions were included. The pooled OR of malignancy for linear, focal, segmental, regional, multiple region, and diffuse distributions are 0.70 (95%CI: 0.44-1.14), 0.37 (95% CI: 0.26-0.54), 2.42 (95% CI: 1.62-3.62), 0.56 (95% CI: 0.11-2.79), 2.80 (95% CI: 0.96-8.21), and 3.35 (95% CI: 0.59-19.04), respectively. The pooled OR of malignancy for homogenous, heterogeneous, clustered ring enhancement, and clumped enhancement are 0.39 (95% CI: 0.23-0.67), 0.59 (95% CI: 0.40-0.85), 2.92 (95% CI: 1.86-4.57), and 1.49 (95% CI: 0.96-2.32), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Based on a meta-analysis of 8 studies and more than one thousand non-mass enhancing lesions, diffuse, multiple regions and clustered ring descriptors of enhancement have the highest pooled OR for malignancy.

Comparison of Performance in Diagnosis and Characterization of Breast Lesions: Contrast-Enhanced Mammography Versus Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging

INTRODUCTION

In contemporary medical practice, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive modality for detecting breast cancer. Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM), a relatively recent technology, represents another contrast-enhanced imaging technique that has the potential to serve as an alternative to breast MRI. Our main goal is to compare the diagnostic accuracy including assessment of sensitivity and specificity of these 2 contrast-enhanced breast imaging methods, CEM and MRI, in the diagnosis and characterization of breast lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Our prospective study included patients who were clinically suspected of malignancy and/or had suspicious findings detected by mammography or ultrasound. A total of 116 patients were included, and both CEM and MRI examinations were performed on all patients. All CEM examinations were conducted at our institution, while 56.89% of all MRI examinations were carried out at external centers. While histopathological results were accessible for all malignant lesions, the final diagnosis for 80.5% of benign lesions was established through typical imaging findings and adequate follow-up.

RESULTS

This study encompassed a total of 219 lesions, with 125 out of 219 (57.07%) malignant lesions and 94 out of 219 (42.92%) benign lesions. The sensitivity and specificity values were 98.40% and 81.91%, respectively, for CEM, and 100% and 75.33%, respectively, for MRI. Moreover, CEM showcased comparable performance to MRI in evaluating women with dense breasts.

CONCLUSION

CEM and MRI were compared for breast lesion diagnosis, with MRI showing higher sensitivity and CEM higher specificity; however, the differences were not statistically significant.

Differentiation between Clinically Noninflammatory Granulomatous Lobular Mastitis and Noncalcified Ductal Carcinoma in situ Using Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Challenges in differentiation between clinically noninflammatory granulomatous lobular mastitis (GLM) and noncalcified ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remain. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> To identify the dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) characteristics contributing to their differential diagnosis. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A total of 33 clinically noninflammatory GLM and 36 noncalcified DCIS were retrospectively analyzed in the study. Internal enhancement of a nonmass enhancement (NME) lesion was divided into clustered enhanced ring (absence/presence), and clustered enhanced ring (presence) was further classified as small and large ring based on the optimal cutoff value. The 5th Breast Imaging and Data System MRI descriptors were used for assessing the other DCE-MRI characteristics. Multivariate analysis including variables with significant differences in univariate analyses was conducted to identify the independent predictors. The discriminative abilities of different predictors and their combination were compared by area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUCs). <b><i>Results:</i></b> An NME lesion was seen more commonly in clinically noninflammatory GLM than in noncalcified DCIS (<i>p</i> = 0.003). DCE-MRI characteristics with significant differences in univariate analyses included NME size, clustered enhanced ring (absence/presence), ring size, initial increase and kinetic characteristics for the differentiation between these two entities presenting as NME lesion. Clustered enhanced ring (presence) was further classified as small (≤7 mm) or large ring (&#x3e;7 mm). Multivariate analysis revealed that internal enhancement and initial increase were identified as significant independent predictors, and the AUC of their combination achieved the highest value of 0.867 (95% CI, 0.748–0.943). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> An NME lesion with a large ring is more highly suggestive of clinically noninflammatory GLM.

The MRI characteristics of non-mass enhancement lesions of the breast: associations with malignancy

OBJECTIVE:

The American College of Radiology updated the terms used for expressing the imaging characteristics of non-mass enhancement (NME) lesions in the fifth edition of the breast imaging-reporting data system (BI-RADS) lexicon. Both the distribution and internal enhancement descriptors were revised for NME lesions. Our aim was to determine the MRI characteristics of NME lesions and to investigate their association with malignancy.

METHODS:

The MRI results of 129 NME lesions were retrospectively evaluated. The medical files, biopsy results and follow-up findings of lesions were recorded. Patients who had benign biopsy and those who had stable or regressed lesions during follow-up were classified as benign. All MRI results had been obtained with a 1.5 Tesla Signa HDx MR system (GE Healthcare).

RESULTS:

Segmental and diffuse distribution along with clustered-ring internal enhancement were significantly associated with malignancy, while linear distribution and homogeneous enhancement pattern were associated with benignancy. Additionally, the plateau type (Type II) curve was significantly more frequent in malignant lesions. There was no association between the presence of cystic structures and the benign/malignant nature of the lesion. However, multivariate logistic regression showed that only segmental distribution and diffusion restriction were associated with malignancy.

CONCLUSION:

In the current study, segmental distribution, clustered-ring enhancement, Type II dynamic curve and the presence of diffusion restriction were found to be associated with malignancy. There is a requirement for multicenter studies which include higher numbers of patients in order to better evaluate lesions with rarer characteristics for distribution and enhancement pattern.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:

Our aim in this study was to investigate the MRI characteristics of NME lesions. We have reported the MRI findings of NME lesions and have found that segmental distribution and clustered-ring enhancement patterns are significantly more frequent in malignant lesions.

Grading system to categorize breast MRI using BI-RADS 5th edition: a statistical study of non-mass enhancement descriptors in terms of probability of malignancy

PURPOSE

To analyze the association of breast non-mass enhancement descriptors in the BI-RADS 5th edition with malignancy, and to establish a grading system and categorization of descriptors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was approved by our institutional review board. A total of 213 patients were enrolled. Breast MRI was performed with a 1.5-T MRI scanner using a 16-channel breast radiofrequency coil. Two radiologists determined internal enhancement and distribution of non-mass enhancement by consensus. Corresponding pathologic diagnoses were obtained by either biopsy or surgery. The probability of malignancy by descriptor was analyzed using Fisher's exact test and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The probability of malignancy by category was analyzed using Fisher's exact and multi-group comparison tests.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-eight lesions were malignant. Multivariate model analysis showed that internal enhancement (homogeneous vs others, p < 0.001, heterogeneous and clumped vs clustered ring, p = 0.003) and distribution (focal and linear vs segmental, p < 0.001) were the significant explanatory variables. The descriptors were classified into three grades of suspicion, and the categorization (3, 4A, 4B, 4C, and 5) by sum-up grades showed an incremental increase in the probability of malignancy (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The three-grade criteria and categorization by sum-up grades of descriptors appear valid for non-mass enhancement.

Clinics in diagnostic imaging (180). Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

A 26-year-old woman presented with a slow-growing right breast lump. Excision biopsy of the lump showed invasive ductal carcinoma with adjacent ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Preoperative imaging was performed to assess the extent of disease. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the breasts showed an area of clustered ring enhancement deep to the biopsy site, which was representative of residual DCIS. DCIS is a common noninvasive malignancy that manifests as a primary breast tumour or in association with other lesions. The radiological features of DCIS are discussed herein, with special attention to the clustered ring enhancement pattern on MR imaging.

Significant MRI indicators of malignancy for breast non-mass enhancement

OBJECTIVE

To explore and evaluate new malignant predictors of breast non-mass enhancement lesions using the new BI-RADS MRI lexicon.

METHODS

A dataset involving 422 consecutive women underwent breast 3.0 T MRI between January 2014 and July 2016 was assembled for this study. Each case was retrospectively reviewed by 3 radiologists. Eighty-four lesions that present non-mass enhancement in 79 patients were identified in the study. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI features were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analyses to identify significant indicators of malignancy.

RESULTS

Of 84 non-mass enhancement lesions, 52 (61.9%) were malignant and 32 (38.1%) were benign. Segmental distribution (P = 0.015 from univariate analysis; OR = 4.739, P = 0.008 from multivariate analysis), cluster ring enhancement (P = 0.017 from univariate analysis; OR = 3.601, P = 0.032 from multivariate analysis), time-intensity curve of plateau (P = 0.002 from univariate analysis; OR = 3.525, P = 0.027 from multivariate analysis) and phase to peak (P = 0.06 from univariate analysis; OR = 6.327, P = 0.015 from multivariate analysis) were significantly different between malignant and benign lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that segmental distribution, clustered ring enhancement, and short time to peak could act as new malignant predictors for breast non-mass enhancement detected on 3.0 T MRI.

Association of Different MRI BIRADS Descriptors With Malignancy in Non Mass-Like Breast Lesions

Background:

Several studies on the diagnostic efficacy of MRI has not real consensus for the accuracy of MRI characteristics in non mass like breast lesions, and the number of malignant lesions in different studies is insufficient.

Objectives:

In this study we aimed to analyze the diagnostic role of MRI BIRADS features for diagnosis of malignancy in non mass like breast lesions.

Patients and Methods:

All patients with positive findings (BIRADS 3, 4, 5), which had either biopsy proved pathology or follow-up MRI data at least for 12 months were included in the study. Finally, 213 breasts MRI that showed non mass like enhancing lesions among our patients were assessed in study. One experienced breast radiologist who was unaware of any clinical information or the histopathologic diagnosis evaluated all images retrospectively. The morphologic parameters evaluated consisted of distribution modifiers and pattern of internal enhancement. The kinetic enhancement parameters were assessed as showing washout, plateau, or persistent patterns. In the enhancement kinetic analysis, thew most worrisome curve type in each lesion was considered for interpretation, if it was more than 2% enhancement. We have evaluated the visual findings by comparison of the signal intensity on the first and third dynamic series. Data for the study were extracted from the breast MRI database and analyzed using SPSS version 16 statistical software.

Results:

Totally 188 patients had 213 non mass like lesions. Mean age of the patients was 44.9 ± 8.3 years (24-63). Totally 46 of lesions were malignant (21.6%). The most common BIRADS score was 4 (116; 54.5%). The most prevalent feature of distribution, internal enhancement and curve type were focal (59.2%), clumped (27.2%) and washout (34.3%). Distribution of different subgroups of MR BIRADS features was different among benign and malignant lesions (All Pvalues < 0.05). Regarding association with malignancy, odds ratio of lesions with segmental or ductal linear distribution was 3.4 (95% CI = 1.7-6.8), Clumped, Reticular and Dendritic internal enhancement was 2.5 (95% CI = 1.3-5) and wash out curve type was 5.4 (95% CI = 2.7-10.9). Sensitivity of higher MR BIRADS (4,5) for diagnosis of malignancy was 100%. Specificity of segmental or ductal linear distribution in diagnosis of malignancy was 81%. Specificity of BIRADS 5 for diagnosis of malignancy was 98%. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis for diagnosis of malignancy in which distribution, internal enhancement and curve type were considered as independent variables, distribution and curve type remained significant in the model while the internal enhancement showed a borderline P-value.

Conclusions:

Although in our study washout pattern was the most powerful indicator for malignant pathology in non mass like enhancing lesions, more studies with larger sample size needs in this regard.

High-spatial-resolution 3-T breast MRI of nonmasslike enhancement lesions: an analysis of their features as significant predictors of malignancy

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the features of nonmasslike enhancement detected on 3-T MRI and to determine which of these features are significant predictors of malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review was performed of 124 consecutive patients with nonmasslike enhancement detected on 3-T MRI after biopsy or surgery. We described nonmasslike enhancement using the descriptors in the BI-RADS MRI lexicon. In addition to the BI-RADS descriptors, whether clustered ring enhancement was present and whether surrounding high signal intensity (SI) was present on T2-weighted imaging were assessed.

RESULTS

Cancer was identified in 85 lesions (69%). Of these lesions, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) was found in 41 (48%) and invasive cancer in 44 (52%). The features found to be significant predictors of malignancy were segmental (p = 0.001), focal (p = 0.006), dendritic (p = 0.017), and clustered ring enhancement (p = 0.026) and surrounding high SI on T2-weighted imaging (p < 0.0001). The features found to be significant predictors of invasive cancer were dendritic enhancement (p < 0.0001) and surrounding high SI on T2-weighted imaging (p < 0.0001). There were no significant predictive features for DCIS. Homogeneous enhancement was found to be a significant predictor of benignancy (p = 0.001). Kinetic patterns were not significant predictors of malignancy. Nonmasslike enhancement of 1 cm or larger was more often malignant than lesions smaller than 1 cm (p < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, a lesion size of 1 cm or larger was found to be the only significant predictor of malignancy for nonmasslike enhancement.

CONCLUSION

Segmental, focal, dendritic, and clustered ring enhancement; surrounding high SI on T2-weighted imaging; and a lesion size of 1 cm or larger can act as predictors of malignancy for nonmasslike enhancement detected on 3-T MRI, but kinetic characteristics cannot.

Impact of breast MR in non-screening Australian clinical practice: audit data from a single-reader single-centre site

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and clinical impact of single-reader breast MR (BMR) used as a clinical 'problem solving' tool.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective, ethics approved data collection for all BMR were from May 2006 to February 2009 (n=143). Cases were stratified into groups according to indication for referral. MR data included single-reader MR diagnosis and breast imaging reporting and data system category (per-patient basis), MR descriptors of lesions (breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon), lesion number and location. Composite reference standard was established from surgical histology, core histology, cytology, MR imaging follow-up, conventional imaging follow-up and clinical follow-up in that order of priority. Impact was qualitatively captured by estimating change in management as the result of BMR.

RESULTS

Eighty-two cases were included and 61 were excluded (41 insufficient follow-up times, three known benign mass for clarification, two worried well screening and 15 other reasons). There was no statistically significant difference in included and excluded patient profiles. Our largest group of referrals was of patients with suspicious or unhelpful conventional imaging. BMR identified five malignancies in that group but missed four. In our smaller group of patients with metastatic axillary lymph nodes, BMR identified the occult primary cancer in all five cases.

CONCLUSION

In this 'problem solving' patient population, breast MR shows greatest impact in patients with carcinoma metastases to axillary nodes, but primary not visible. In symptomatic women with unhelpful imaging or with suspicious imaging but no pre-MR diagnosis, MR identified 5/41 carcinomas, but missed 4/41.

The role of breast MR imaging in pre-operative determination of invasive disease for ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed by needle biopsy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether magnetic resonance (MR) imaging features can predict the presence of occult invasion in cases of biopsy-proven pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 92 biopsy-proven pure DCIS in 92 women who underwent MR imaging. The following MR imaging findings were compared between confirmed DCIS and invasive breast cancer (IBC): lesion size, type, morphological and kinetic assessments by ACR BI-RADS MRI, and findings of fat-suppressed T2-weighted (FS-T2W) imaging.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight of 92 (74%) were non-mass-like enhancements (NMLE) and 24 were mass lesions on MR imaging. Twenty-one of 68 (31%) NMLE and 13 of 24 (54%) mass lesions were confirmed as IBC. In NMLE lesions, large lesions (P = 0.007) and higher signal intensities (SI) on FS-T2W images (P = 0.032) were significantly associated with IBC. Lesion size remained a significant independent predictor of invasion in multivariate analysis (P = 0.032), and combined with FS-T2W SIs showed slightly higher observer performances (area under the curve, AUC, 0.71) than lesion size alone (AUC 0.68). There were no useful findings that enabled the differentiation of mass-type lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast MR imaging is potentially useful to predict the presence of occult invasion in biopsy-proven DCIS with NMLE.

KEY POINTS

MR mammography permits more precise lesion assessment including ductal carcinoma in situ A correct diagnosis of occult invasion before treatment is important for clinicians This study showed the potential of MR mammography to diagnose occult invasion Treatment and/or aggressive biopsy can be given with greater confidence MR mammography can lead to more appropriate management of patients.

Radiologic-pathologic correlation of ductal carcinoma in situ

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for 20%-25% of breast cancers detected at screening mammography. The lesions are diverse and commonly are classified on the basis of their mammographic features and histologic characteristics such as nuclear grade and presence or absence of necrosis. The most common mammographic finding in DCIS is microcalcifications, but a low-grade lesion without necrosis is less likely to manifest with calcifications than either an intermediate- or a high-grade lesion. Other mammographic findings might include a mass or architectural distortion. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has higher sensitivity than mammography for the detection of DCIS and greater accuracy for depicting the extent of disease. The MR imaging appearance of DCIS depends primarily on the presence and extent of abnormal periductal or stromal vascularity. Nonmasslike enhancement, the most common MR imaging finding, is often seen in association with clumped internal enhancement. The enhancement kinetics in dynamic MR studies vary, and no kinetic pattern is pathognomonic of a particular nuclear grade of DCIS. However, the kinetic pattern at delayed imaging does appear to be correlated with the mammographic findings: Mass lesions show strong washout; fine pleomorphic, fine linear, and fine linear-branching calcifications demonstrate a plateau enhancement pattern; and amorphous calcifications exhibit persistent enhancement. Multidetector computed tomography might be a useful adjunct to MR imaging for preoperative mapping.