Dataset Information

Fully automatic quantification of fibroglandular tissue and background parenchymal enhancement with accurate implementation for axial and sagittal breast MRI protocols.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To propose and evaluate a fully automated technique for quantification of fibroglandular tissue (FGT) and background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) in breast MRI.

Methods

We propose a fully automated method, where after preprocessing, FGT is segmented in T1-weighted, nonfat-saturated MRI. Incorporating an anatomy-driven prior probability for FGT and robust texture descriptors against intensity variations, our method effectively addresses major image processing challenges, including wide variations in breast anatomy and FGT appearance among individuals. Our framework then propagates this segmentation to dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI to quantify BPE within the segmented FGT regions. Axial and sagittal image data from 40 cancer-unaffected women were used to evaluate our proposed method vs a manually annotated reference standard.

Results

High spatial correspondence was observed between the automatic and manual FGT segmentation (mean Dice similarity coefficient 81.14%). The FGT and BPE quantifications (denoted FGT% and BPE%) indicated high correlation (Pearson's r = 0.99 for both) between automatic and manual segmentations. Furthermore, the differences between the FGT% and BPE% quantified using automatic and manual segmentations were low (mean differences: -0.66 ± 2.91% for FGT% and -0.17 ± 1.03% for BPE%). When correlated with qualitative clinical BI-RADS ratings, the correlation coefficient for FGT% was still high (Spearman's ρ = 0.92), whereas that for BPE was lower (ρ = 0.65). Our proposed approach also performed significantly better than a previously validated method for sagittal breast MRI.

Conclusions

Our method demonstrated accurate fully automated quantification of FGT and BPE in both sagittal and axial breast MRI. Our results also suggested the complexity of BPE assessment, demonstrating relatively low correlation between segmentation and clinical rating.

SUBMITTER: Wei D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7902433 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBackground parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may be associated with breast cancer risk, but previous studies of the association are equivocal and limited by incomplete blinding of BPE assessment. In this study, we evaluated the association between BPE and breast cancer based on fully blinded assessments of BPE in the unaffected breast.MethodsThe Imaging and Epidemiology (IMAGINE) study is a multicenter breast cancer case-control study of women receiving diagnostic, screening, or follow-up breast MRI, recruited from three comprehensive cancer centers in the USA. Cases had a first diagnosis of unilateral breast cancer and controls had no history of or current breast cancer. A single board-certified breast radiologist with 12 years' experience, blinded to case-control status and clinical information, assessed the unaffected breast for BPE without view of the affected breast of cases (or the corresponding breast laterality of controls). The association between BPE and breast cancer was estimated by multivariable logistic regression separately for premenopausal and postmenopausal women.ResultsThe analytic dataset included 835 cases and 963 controls. Adjusting for fibroglandular tissue (breast density), age, race/ethnicity, BMI, parity, family history of breast cancer, BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations, and other confounders, moderate/marked BPE (vs minimal/mild BPE) was associated with breast cancer among premenopausal women [odds ratio (OR) 1.49, 95% CI 1.05-2.11; p = 0.02]. Among postmenopausal women, mild/moderate/marked vs minimal BPE had a similar, but statistically non-significant, association with breast cancer (OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.92-2.27; p = 0.1).ConclusionsBPE is associated with breast cancer in premenopausal women, and possibly postmenopausal women, after adjustment for breast density and confounders. Our results suggest that BPE should be evaluated alongside breast density for inclusion in models predicting breast cancer risk.

Project description:Purpose To evaluate the effect of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging interpretive performance in a large multi-institutional cohort with independent analysis of screening and diagnostic MR studies. Materials and Methods Analysis of 3770 breast MR studies was conducted. Examinations were performed in 2958 women at six participating facilities in the San Francisco Bay Area from January 2010 to October 2012. Findings were recorded prospectively in the San Francisco Mammography Registry. Performance measures were compared between studies with low BPE (mild or minimal) and those with high BPE (moderate or marked) by using binomial tests of proportions. Results Of 1726 MR imaging studies in the screening group, 1301 were classified as having low BPE and 425 were classified as having high BPE (75% vs 25%, respectively; P < .001). Of 2044 MR imaging studies in the diagnostic group, 1443 were classified as having low BPE and 601 were classified as having high BPE (71% vs 29%, respectively; P < .001). For low versus high BPE groups at screening, abnormal interpretation rate was 157 of 1301 versus 111 of 424 (12% vs 26%, P < .001); biopsy recommendation rate was 85 of 1301 versus 54 of 424 (7% vs 13%, P < .001); and specificity was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87, 91) versus 75% (95% CI: 71, 80) (P = .01). For the low versus high BPE groups at diagnostic MR imaging, biopsy recommendation rate was 325 of 1443 versus 195 of 601 (23% vs 32%, P < .001); and specificity was 86% (95% CI: 84, 88) versus 75% (95% CI: 74, 82) (P < .001). There were no significant differences between studies with low versus high BPE in sensitivity for screening (76% [95% CI: 55, 91] vs 83% [95% CI: 52, 98]; P = .94) or diagnostic (93% [95% CI: 87, 97] vs 96% [95% CI: 87, 99]; P = .69) MR imaging, nor were there significant differences in cancer detection rate per 1000 patients between the low BPE versus high BPE groups for screening (15 per 1000 vs 24 per 1000, P = .30) or diagnostic (78 per 1000 vs 85 per 1000, P = .64) MR imaging. Conclusion Relative to MR studies with minimal or mild BPE, those with moderate or marked BPE were associated with higher abnormal interpretation and biopsy rates and lower specificity, with no difference in cancer detection rate. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.