1
|
Nissan N, Gluskin J, Ochoa-Albiztegui RE, Sung JS, Jochelson MS. Asymmetric background parenchymal enhancement on contrast-enhanced mammography: associated factors, diagnostic workup, and clinical outcome. Eur Radiol 2025; 35:712-722. [PMID: 39080066 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-10856-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2024] [Revised: 04/09/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 02/01/2025]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To summarize our institutional experience with contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) exams reporting asymmetric background parenchymal enhancement (BPE). MATERIALS AND METHODS Consecutive CEMs performed between December 2012 and July 2023 were retrospectively reviewed to identify exams reporting asymmetric BPE. Associated factors, the level of reporting certainty, BI-RADS score, diagnostic workup, and clinical outcome were summarized. BPE grades and BI-RADS were compared between initial CEM vs. immediate MRI and 6-month follow-up CEM, when indicated, using the Sign test. RESULTS Overall, 175/12,856 (1.4%) CEMs (140 female patients, mean age, 46 ± 8.0 years) reported asymmetric BPE. Reporting certainty was mostly high (n = 86), then moderate (n = 59) and low (n = 30). Associated factors included contralateral irradiation (n = 94), recent ipsilateral breast treatment (n = 14), and unilateral breastfeeding (n = 4). BI-RADS scores were 0 (n = 21), 1/2 (n = 75), 3 (n = 67), 4 (n = 3), and 6 (n = 1), or given for a finding other than asymmetric BPE (n = 8). Initial diagnostic-workup often included targeted-US (n = 107). Immediate MRI (n = 65) and/or 6-month CEM follow-up (n = 69) downgraded most cases, with a significant decrease in BPE grade compared to the initial CEM (p < 0.01 for both). On follow-up, two underlying cancers were diagnosed in the area of questionable asymmetric BPE. CONCLUSION Apparent asymmetric BPE is most often a benign finding with an identifiable etiology. However, rarely, it may mask an underlying malignancy presenting as non-mass enhancement, thus requiring additional scrutiny. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT The variability in the diagnostic-workup of apparent asymmetric background parenchymal enhancement stresses the clinical challenge of this radiological finding. Further studies are required to verify these initial observations and to establish standardized management guidelines. KEY POINTS Apparent asymmetric background parenchymal enhancement usually represents a benign clinical correlate, though rarely it may represent malignancy. Evaluation of asymmetric background parenchymal enhancement varied considerably in the metrics that were examined. Targeted US and MRI can be useful in evaluating unexplained asymmetric background parenchymal enhancement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Noam Nissan
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Jill Gluskin
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | | | - Janice S Sung
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA
| | - Maxine S Jochelson
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Müller-Franzes G, Khader F, Tayebi Arasteh S, Huck L, Bode M, Han T, Lemainque T, Kather JN, Nebelung S, Kuhl C, Truhn D. Intraindividual Comparison of Different Methods for Automated BPE Assessment at Breast MRI: A Call for Standardization. Radiology 2024; 312:e232304. [PMID: 39012249 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.232304] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/17/2024]
Abstract
Background The level of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) at breast MRI provides predictive and prognostic information and can have diagnostic implications. However, there is a lack of standardization regarding BPE assessment. Purpose To investigate how well results of quantitative BPE assessment methods correlate among themselves and with assessments made by radiologists experienced in breast MRI. Materials and Methods In this pseudoprospective analysis of 5773 breast MRI examinations from 3207 patients (mean age, 60 years ± 10 [SD]), the level of BPE was prospectively categorized according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System by radiologists experienced in breast MRI. For automated extraction of BPE, fibroglandular tissue (FGT) was segmented in an automated pipeline. Four different published methods for automated quantitative BPE extractions were used: two methods (A and B) based on enhancement intensity and two methods (C and D) based on the volume of enhanced FGT. The results from all methods were correlated, and agreement was investigated in comparison with the respective radiologist-based categorization. For surrogate validation of BPE assessment, how accurately the methods distinguished premenopausal women with (n = 50) versus without (n = 896) antihormonal treatment was determined. Results Intensity-based methods (A and B) exhibited a correlation with radiologist-based categorization of 0.56 ± 0.01 and 0.55 ± 0.01, respectively, and volume-based methods (C and D) had a correlation of 0.52 ± 0.01 and 0.50 ± 0.01 (P < .001). There were notable correlation differences (P < .001) between the BPE determined with the four methods. Among the four quantitation methods, method D offered the highest accuracy for distinguishing women with versus without antihormonal therapy (P = .01). Conclusion Results of different methods for quantitative BPE assessment agree only moderately among themselves or with visual categories reported by experienced radiologists; intensity-based methods correlate more closely with radiologists' ratings than volume-based methods. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mann in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gustav Müller-Franzes
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Firas Khader
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Soroosh Tayebi Arasteh
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Luisa Huck
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Maike Bode
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Tianyu Han
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Teresa Lemainque
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Jakob Nikolas Kather
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Sven Nebelung
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Christiane Kuhl
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| | - Daniel Truhn
- From the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstr 30, 52074 Aachen, Germany (G.M.F., F.K., S.T.A., L.H., M.B., T.H., T.L., S.N., C.K., D.T.); National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany (J.N.K.); Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.); and Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany (J.N.K.)
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Taylor H, Alhasan S, Saleem M, Poole S, Jiang F, Longbrake EE, Bove R. Influence of menstrual cycle and hormonal contraceptive use on MS symptom fluctuations: A pilot study. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2023; 77:104864. [PMID: 37480738 PMCID: PMC11090415 DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2023.104864] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2023] [Revised: 06/22/2023] [Accepted: 06/29/2023] [Indexed: 07/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In clinical practice, females with MS often report menstrually-related symptom fluctuations. Hypothetically, use of oral contraceptives (OCs) could reduce these fluctuations, particularly continuous OCs (11+ weeks of consistent exogenous hormones followed by 1 week placebo). OBJECTIVES To prospectively capture (1) whether neurologic and generalized symptoms vary with menstrual cycle phase and (2) whether type of contraception impacts symptom fluctuations. METHODS In this two-center pilot study, females with MS and a regular menstrual cycle prospectively tracked their menstrual cycles and completed symptom surveys for up to 6 months. Participants were categorized as 1) users of oral contraceptives, either a) cyclic or b) continuous, or 2) endogenously cycling, either c) hormonal intrauterine device (IUD) users or d) "none users" (e.g. no hormonal contraception; included condoms, copper IUD, tubal ligation, "fertility awareness methods"). There was no correction for multiple analyses. RESULTS Altogether, 47/70 participants (67%) provided >4 weeks of data and were included in the analyses. Mean (SD) age was 35.0 (0.9) years, median (IQR) EDSS was 1.5 (1-2) and mean (SD) SymptoMScreen score was 10.4 (9.6). For endogenously cycling patients (IUD and none users), fatigue (MFIS) was lower in the perimenstrual period than in the luteal period (p < 0.05). For continuous OC users, variability in symptoms was lower than for endogenously cycling females (MFIS: p < 0.01; Daily Hassles, from Uplift & Hassles Survey: p < 0.05) or cyclic OC users (MFIS: p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In this pilot study, symptom severity did not definitively fluctuate in relationship to the menstrual cycle in endogenously cycling participants. However, fatigue and daily hassles were less variable for participants using continuous OC than for cyclic OC users or no-OC users. Future confirmatory studies are warranted to further examine whether contraceptive choice can be leveraged to manage symptom fluctuation in cycling females with MS. Such studies could enroll larger cohorts over fewer cycles or employ incentivization and hormonal measurements to enhance participant retention and statistical power.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helga Taylor
- UCSF Weill Institute for the Neurosciences, Department of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Saleh Alhasan
- Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, New Haven, CT, United States
| | - Maha Saleem
- Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, New Haven, CT, United States
| | - Shane Poole
- UCSF Weill Institute for the Neurosciences, Department of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Fei Jiang
- School of Medicine, Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States
| | - Erin E Longbrake
- Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Neurology, New Haven, CT, United States
| | - Riley Bove
- UCSF Weill Institute for the Neurosciences, Department of Neurology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hunt JT, Kamat R, Yao M, Sharma N, Batur P. Effect of contraceptive hormonal therapy on mammographic breast density: A longitudinal cohort study. Clin Imaging 2023; 97:62-67. [PMID: 36893493 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2023.03.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2022] [Revised: 02/25/2023] [Accepted: 03/01/2023] [Indexed: 03/08/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Evaluate the longitudinal relationship between mammographic density and hormonal contraceptive use in late reproductive-aged women. METHODS Patients aged 35-50 years old who underwent 5 or more screening mammograms within a 7.5-year period between 2004 and 2019 in a single urban tertiary care center were randomly selected. Patients were categorized into four cohorts based on hormonal contraceptive exposure during a 2-year lead-in period and a 7.5-year study period: 1) never exposed, 2) always exposed, 3) interval hormonal contraceptive start, and 4) interval hormonal contraceptive stop. The primary outcome was difference in BI-RADS breast density category between initial and final mammograms. RESULTS Of the 708 patients included, long-term use of combined oral contraceptives or a levonorgestrel intrauterine device were not associated with an increase in breast density category over the 7.5-year study period, compared to those with no hormonal contraceptive exposure. Initiation of combined oral contraceptives was associated with an increase in breast density category (β = 0.31, P = 0.045); however, no difference in initial density category was noted between those exposed and those never exposed to combined oral contraceptives during the 2-year lead-in period, and discontinuation was not associated with a decrease in breast density category when compared to those with continuous exposure. CONCLUSION(S) Long-term use of combined oral contraceptives or a levonorgestrel intrauterine device was not associated with an increase in BI-RADS breast density category. Initiation of a combined oral contraceptive was associated with an increase in breast density category, although this may be a transient effect.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan T Hunt
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Desk A81, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States.
| | - Rachel Kamat
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Desk A81, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States
| | - Meng Yao
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States
| | - Nidhi Sharma
- Austin Radiological Association Women's Imaging Center, Suite 100, 1600 West 38(th) Street, Austin, TX 78731, United States
| | - Pelin Batur
- Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Women's Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Desk A81, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195, United States
| |
Collapse
|