Predictive performance of BI-RADS magnetic resonance imaging descriptors in the context of suspicious (category 4) findings

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.

Are we ready to stratify BI-RADS 4 lesions observed on magnetic resonance imaging? A real-world noninferiority/equivalence analysis

Objective

To demonstrate that positive predictive values (PPVs) for suspicious (category 4) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings that have been stratified are equivalent to those stipulated in the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) for mammography and ultrasound.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective analysis of electronic medical records generated between January 4, 2016 and December 29, 2021 provided 365 patients in which 419 suspicious (BI-RADS category 4) findings were subcategorized as BI-RADS 4A, 4B or 4C. Malignant and nonmalignant outcomes were determined by pathologic analyses, follow-up, or both. For each subcategory, the level 2 PPV (PPV2) was calculated and tested for equivalence/noninferiority against the established benchmarks.

Results

Of the 419 findings evaluated, 168 (40.1%) were categorized as malignant and 251 (59.9%) were categorized as nonmalignant. The PPV2 for subcategory 4A was 14.2% (95% CI: 9.3-20.4%), whereas it was 41.2% (95% CI: 32.8-49.9%) for subcategory 4B and 77.2% (95% CI: 68.4-84.5%) for subcategory 4C. Multivariate analysis showed a significantly different cancer yield for each subcategory (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

We found that stratification of suspicious findings by MRI criteria is feasible, and malignancy probabilities for sub-categories 4B and 4C are equivalent to the values established for the other imaging methods in the BI-RADS. Nevertheless, low suspicion (4A) findings might show slightly higher malignancy rates.

Magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of non-mass enhancement of the breast

Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System magnetic resonance imaging (BI-RADS-MRI) classifies lesions as mass, non-mass enhancement (NME), or focus. BI-RADS ultrasound does not currently have the concept of non-mass. Additionally, knowing the concept of NME in MRI is significant. Thus, this study aimed to provide a narrative review of NME diagnosis in breast MRI. Lexicons are defined with distribution (focal, linear, segmental, regional, multiple regions, and diffuse) and internal enhancement patterns (homogenous, heterogeneous, clumped, and clustered ring) in the case of NME. Among these, linear, segmental, clumped, clustered ring, and heterogeneous are the terms that suggest malignancy. Hence, a hand search was conducted for reports of malignancy frequencies. The malignancy frequency in NME is widely distributed, ranging from 25 to 83.6%, and the frequency of each finding varies. Latest techniques, such as diffusion-weighted imaging and ultrafast dynamic MRI, are attempted to differentiate NME. Additionally, attempts are made in the preoperative setting to determine the concordance of lesion spread based on findings and the presence of invasion.

Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracies of USG, MG and MRI Modalities Defined with BI-RADS Classification System

BACKGROUND

BI-RADS classification provides facilitating information in diagnosis for radiologists. It allows radiologists to interpret mammograms accurately Objective: We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the modalities with the BI-RADS classification system made with imaging findings accompanied by USG, MG and MRI, which are a total of 3 modalities.

METHODS

This study included 82 patients who underwent Tru-Cut biopsy under the guidance of USG, MG, and MRI. Mammography, sonography and MRI were performed in the prone position.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 46.3%, 14.6%, and 39.0% were assessed in 4A, 4B, and 5 MRI BI-RADS categories, respectively. Based on the variable surgical/pathological diagnosis, 50%, 28.0%, and 22.0% of the patients were categorized as malignant findings, benign findings, and infection-inflammation-mastitis, respectively. The determination of the endpoints for the parameter of long-axis diameter (mm) was found to be statistically significant according to ROC analysis as a gold standard performed based on specificity levels of benign and malignant findings (p<0.05). A significant correlation was detected between the gold standard and the categorical variable MRI BI-RADS (χ^2=46.380, p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

When specificity and sensitivity of all three modalities in surgical/pathological diagnosis were compared, it was concluded that MRI was superior to the other modalities, and a valuable method in prediction of lesion malignancy and determination of biopsy prediction and priority.

Subcategory classifications of Breast Imaging and Data System (BI-RADS) category 4 lesions on MRI

PURPOSE

Category 4 in BI-RADS for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has a wide range of probabilities of malignancy, extending from > 2 to < 95%. We classified category 4 lesions into three subcategories and analyzed the positive predictive value (PPV) of malignancy in a tertiary hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 346 breast MRIs with 434 category 2-5 lesions. All enhancing lesions were classified as category 2 (0% probability of malignancy), 3 (> 0%, ≤ 2%), 4 (> 2%, < 95%) and 5 (≥ 95%); category 4 lesions were further subcategorized into 4A (> 2%, ≤ 10%), 4B (> 10%, ≤ 50%) and 4C (> 50%, < 95%) at the time of diagnosis. Radiological and pathological reports were retrospectively analyzed, and the PPVs were calculated.

RESULTS

We included 149 malignant and 285 benign lesions. The PPVs of subcategories 4A, 4B and 4C were 1.8%, 11.8% and 67.5%, respectively. The PPVs were higher for lesions coexisting with category 5 or 6 lesions compared with those for isolated lesions.

CONCLUSION

Category 4 lesions can be classified into three subcategories depending on the likelihood of malignancy. Lesions coexisting with category 5 or 6 lesions are more likely to be malignant.

Diffusion-weighted imaging or dynamic contrast-enhanced curve: a retrospective analysis of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging-based differential diagnoses of benign and malignant breast lesions

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic performance of models based on a combination of contrast-enhanced (CE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) or time-intensity curves (TIC) in diagnosing malignancies of breast lesions.

METHODS

A double-blind retrospective study was conducted in 328 patients (254 for training and the following 74 for validation) who underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the breast with pathological results. Two score models, the DWI model (apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) + morphology + enhanced information) and the TIC model (TIC + morphology + enhanced information), were established with binary logistic regression for mass and non-mass enhancements (NMEs) in the training set. The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) were compared between the two models (DWI model vs. TIC model); p < 0.05 was considered as statistically different. External validation was used.

RESULTS

In the training set, the sensitivities, specificities, and AUCs of the DWI/TIC model were 95.2%/95.8%, 70.8%/47.9%, and 0.932/0.891 for masses, and 94.2%/90.4%, 47.4%/47.4%, and 0.798 (95% CI, 0.686-0.884)/0.802 (95% CI, 0.691-0.887) for NMEs, respectively. The AUC of the DWI model was significantly higher than that of the TIC model (p < 0.05) for masses. In the validation set, the AUCs of the DWI/TIC model were 0.896/0.861 for masses (p < 0.05) and 0.936/0.836 for NMEs (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined with CE MRI, the DWI model was superior or equal to the TIC model in differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions.

KEY POINTS

• Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging played an important role in the diagnosis of breast neoplasms. • On the basis of contrast-enhanced MRI, the DWI model had significantly higher diagnostic ability than the TIC model in distinguishing benign and malignant masses. • It would be reasonable to replace the time-consuming TIC with DWI for less scan time and similar diagnostic efficiency.

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.

Breast imaging in patients with nipple discharge

Nipple discharge is a common symptom in clinical practice, representing the third leading breast complaint, after pain and lumps. It is usually limited and has a benign etiology. The risk of malignancy is higher when the discharge is uniductal, unilateral, spontaneous, persistent, bloody, or serous, as well as when it is accompanied by a breast mass. The most common causes of pathologic nipple discharge are papilloma and ductal ectasia. However, there is a 5% risk of malignancy, mainly ductal carcinoma in situ. The clinical examination is an essential part of the patient evaluation, allowing benign nipple discharge to be distinguished from suspicious nipple discharge, which calls for imaging. Mammography and ultrasound should be used together as first-line imaging methods. However, mammography has low sensitivity in cases of nipple discharge, because, typically, the lesions are small, are retroareolar, and contain no calcifications. Because the reported sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound, it is important to use the correct technique to search for intraductal lesions in the retroareolar region. Recent studies recommend the use of magnetic resonance imaging in cases of suspicious nipple discharge in which the mammography and ultrasound findings are normal. The most common magnetic resonance imaging finding is non-mass enhancement. Surgery is no longer the only solution for patients with suspicious nipple discharge, because short-time follow-up can be safely proposed.

Diffusion-weighted imaging of suspicious (BI-RADS 4) breast lesions: stratification based on histopathology

Objective:

To test the use of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in stratifying suspicious breast lesions (BI-RADS 4), correlating them with histopathology. We also investigated the performance of DWI related to the main enhancement patterns (mass and non-mass) and tested its reproducibility.

Materials and Methods:

Seventy-six patients presented 92 lesions during the sampling period. Two independent examiners reviewed magnetic resonance imaging studies, described the lesions, and determined the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. Differences among benign, indeterminate- to high-risk, and malignant findings, in terms of the ADCs, were assessed by analysis of variance. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, we compared the performance of ADC values in masses and non-mass lesions, and tested the reproducibility of measurements by determining the coefficient of variation and smallest real difference.

Results:

Among the 92 lesions evaluated, the histopathology showed that 37 were benign, 11 were indeterminate- to high-risk, and 44 were malignant. The mean ADC differed significantly among those histopathological groups, the value obtained for the malignant lesions (1.10 × 10^-3 mm²/s) being significantly lower than that obtained for the other groups (p < 0.001). ROC curves demonstrated that DWI performed better when applied to masses than when applied to non-mass lesions (area under the curve, 0.88 vs. 0.67). Reproducibility was good (coefficient of variation, 7.03%; and smallest real difference, ± 0.242 × 10^-3 mm²/s).

Conclusion:

DWI can differentiate between malignant and nonmalignant (benign or indeterminate- to high-risk) lesions, showing better performance for masses. Nevertheless, stratification based on histopathological criteria that are more refined has yet to be achieved.

Evaluation of the indications for performing magnetic resonance imaging of the female pelvis at a referral center for cancer, according to the American College of Radiology criteria

Objective

To evaluate the indications for performing magnetic resonance imaging of the female pelvis at a referral center for cancer.

Materials and Methods

This was a retrospective, single-center study, conducted by reviewing medical records and imaging reports. We included 1060 female patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis at a cancer center between January 2013 and June 2014. The indications for performing the examination were classified according to the American College of Radiology (ACR) criteria.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 52.6 ± 14.8 years, and 49.8% were perimenopausal or postmenopausal. The majority (63.9%) had a history of cancer, which was gynecologic in 29.5% and nongynecologic in 34.4%. Of the patients evaluated, 44.0% had clinical complaints, the most common being pelvic pain (in 11.5%) and bleeding (in 9.8%), and 34.7% of patients had previously had abnormal findings on ultrasound. Most (76.7%) of the patients met the criteria for undergoing magnetic resonance imaging, according to the ACR guidelines. The main indications were evaluation of tumor recurrence after surgical resection (in 25.9%); detection and staging of gynecologic neoplasms (in 23.3%); and evaluation of pelvic pain or of a mass (in 17.1%).

Conclusion

In the majority of the cases evaluated, magnetic resonance imaging was clearly indicated according to the ACR criteria. The main indication was local recurrence after surgical treatment of pelvic malignancies, which is consistent with the routine protocols at cancer centers.

Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the planning of breast cancer treatment strategies: comparison with conventional imaging techniques

OBJECTIVE

To assess the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the planning of breast cancer treatment strategies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 160 women diagnosed with breast cancer, who underwent breast MRI for preoperative staging. Using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r), we compared the size of the primary tumor, as determined by MRI, by conventional imaging (mammography and ultrasound), and in the pathological examination (gold standard). The identification of lesions not identified in previous examinations was also evaluated, as was its influence on treatment planning.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 52.2 years (range, 30-81 years), and the most common histological type was invasive ductal carcinoma (in 60.6% of the patients). In terms of the tumor size determined, MRI correlated better with the pathological examination than did mammography (r = 0.872 vs. 0.710) or ultrasound (r = 0.836 vs. 0.704). MRI identified additional lesions in 53 patients (33.1%), including malignant lesions in 20 (12.5%), which led to change in the therapeutic planning in 23 patients (14.4%).

CONCLUSION

Breast MRI proved to be more accurate than conventional imaging in determining the dimensions of the main tumor and was able to identify lesions not identified by other methods evaluated, which altered the therapeutic planning in a significant proportion of cases.