Three-Dimensional Quantitative Validation of Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Background Parenchymal Enhancement Assessments.

The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) and its clinical significance as a biomarker of breast cancer risk has been proposed based on qualitative studies. Previous BPE quantification studies lack appropriate correlation with BPE qualitative assessments. The purpose of this study is to validate our three-dimensional BPE quantification method with standardized BPE qualitative cases. An Institutional Review Board-approved study reviewed 500 consecutive magnetic resonance imaging cases (from January 2013-December 2014) using a strict inclusion criteria and 120 cases that best represented each of the BPE qualitative categories (minimal or mild or moderate or marked) were selected. Blinded to the qualitative data, fibroglandular tissue contours of precontrast and postcontrast images were delineated using an in-house, proprietary segmentation algorithm. Metrics of BPE were calculated including %BPE ([ratio of BPE volume to fibroglandular tissue volume] × 100) at multiple threshold levels to determine the optimal cutoff point for BPE quantification that best correlated with the reference BPE qualitative cases. The highest positive correlation was present at ×1.5 precontrast average signal intensity threshold level (r = 0.84, P < 0.001). At this level, the BPE qualitative assessment of minimal, mild, moderate, and marked correlated with the mean quantitative %BPE of 14.1% (95% CI: 10.9-17.2), 26.1% (95% CI: 22.8-29.3), 45.9% (95% CI: 40.2-51.7), and 74.0% (95% CI: 68.6-79.5), respectively. A one-way analysis of variance with post-hoc analysis showed that at ×1.5 precontrast average signal intensity level, the quantitative %BPE measurements best differentiated the four reference BPE qualitative groups (F [3,117] = 106.8, P < 0.001). Our three-dimensional BPE quantification methodology was validated using the reference BPE qualitative cases and could become an invaluable clinical tool to more accurately assess breast cancer risk and to test chemoprevention strategies.

[1]  Shandong Wu,et al.  Quantitative assessment of background parenchymal enhancement in breast MRI predicts response to risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy: preliminary evaluation in a cohort of BRCA1/2 mutation carriers , 2015, Breast Cancer Research.

[2]  Savannah C Partridge,et al.  Are Qualitative Assessments of Background Parenchymal Enhancement, Amount of Fibroglandular Tissue on MR Images, and Mammographic Density Associated with Breast Cancer Risk? , 2015, Radiology.

[3]  Linda Moy,et al.  Inter- and intrareader agreement for categorization of background parenchymal enhancement at baseline and after training. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  C. Filippi,et al.  Semiautomated Volumetric Measurement on Postcontrast MR Imaging for Analysis of Recurrent and Residual Disease in Glioblastoma Multiforme , 2014, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[5]  R. Birdwell,et al.  Background parenchymal enhancement at breast MR imaging: normal patterns, diagnostic challenges, and potential for false-positive and false-negative interpretation. , 2014, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[6]  Shandong Wu,et al.  Automated fibroglandular tissue segmentation and volumetric density estimation in breast MRI using an atlas-aided fuzzy C-means method. , 2013, Medical physics.

[7]  Linda Moy,et al.  Evaluation of the kinetic properties of background parenchymal enhancement throughout the phases of the menstrual cycle. , 2013, Radiology.

[8]  Linda Moy,et al.  Comparison of 3‐point dixon imaging and fuzzy C‐means clustering methods for breast density measurement , 2013, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[9]  L. Schwartz,et al.  Quantitative X-ray Computed Tomography Peritoneography in Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma Patients Receiving Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy , 2013, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[10]  Shandong Wu,et al.  Automated chest wall line detection for whole-breast segmentation in sagittal breast MR images. , 2013, Medical physics.

[11]  L. Schwartz,et al.  318 Effects of Radiologic Tumor Response of Anti-Glypican-3 GC33 and Multi Tyrosine Kinases Inhibitor Sorafenib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma , 2012 .

[12]  Jennifer D. Brooks,et al.  Impact of Tamoxifen on Amount of Fibroglandular Tissue, Background Parenchymal Enhancement, and Cysts on Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2012, The breast journal.

[13]  Jennifer D. Brooks,et al.  Effect of aromatase inhibitors on background parenchymal enhancement and amount of fibroglandular tissue at breast MR imaging. , 2012, Radiology.

[14]  Jennifer D. Brooks,et al.  Background parenchymal enhancement at breast MR imaging and breast cancer risk. , 2011, Radiology.

[15]  H. Degani,et al.  Principal component analysis of breast DCE‐MRI adjusted with a model‐based method , 2009, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[16]  D. Vanel.  The American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System (BI-RADS): a step towards a universal radiological language? , 2007, European journal of radiology.

[17]  J. Krischer,et al.  BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations account for a large proportion of ovarian carcinoma cases , 2005, Cancer.

[18]  R. Groszmann,et al.  American association for the study of liver diseases , 1992 .

[19]  L. Liberman,et al.  Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). , 2002, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[20]  R. Hoover,et al.  Menopausal estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. , 2000, JAMA.

[21]  E. Thomson,et al.  Recommendations for follow-up care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to Cancer. II. BRCA1 and BRCA2 , 1997 .

[22]  K Offit,et al.  Recommendations for follow-up care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to cancer. II. BRCA1 and BRCA2. Cancer Genetics Studies Consortium. , 1997, JAMA.