Search

Background: Preliminary work has demonstrated that background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) assessed by radiologists is predictive of future breast cancer in women undergoing high-risk screening MRI. Algorithmically assessed measures of BPE offer a more precise and reproducible means of measuring BPE than human readers and thus might improve the predictive performance of future cancer development.Purpose: To determine if algorithmically extracted imaging features of BPE on screening breast MRI in high-risk women are associated with subsequent development of cancer.Study Type: Case-control study.Population: In all, 133 women at high risk for developing breast cancer; 46 of these patients developed breast cancer subsequently over a follow-up period of 2 years.Field Strength/sequence: 5 T or 3.0 T T1 -weighted precontrast fat-saturated and nonfat-saturated sequences and postcontrast nonfat-saturated sequences.Assessment: Automatic features of BPE were extracted with a computer algorithm. Subjective BPE scores from five breast radiologists (blinded to clinical outcomes) were also available.Statistical Tests: Leave-one-out crossvalidation for a multivariate logistic regression model developed using the automatic features and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed to calculate the area under the curve (AUC). Comparison of automatic features and subjective features was performed using a generalized regression model and the P-value was obtained. Odds ratios for automatic and subjective features were compared.Results: The multivariate model discriminated patients who developed cancer from the patients who did not, with an AUC of 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.79, P < 0.001). The imaging features remained independently predictive of subsequent development of cancer (P < 0.003) when compared with the subjective BPE assessment of the readers.Data Conclusion: Automatically extracted BPE measurements may potentially be used to further stratify risk in patients undergoing high-risk screening MRI.Level Of Evidence: 3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:456-464. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess the interobserver variability of readers when outlining breast tumors in MRI, study the reasons behind the variability, and quantify the effect of the variability on algorithmic imaging features extracted from breast MRI. Methods: Four readers annotated breast tumors from the MRI examinations of 50 patients from one institution using a bounding box to indicate a tumor. All of the annotated tumors were biopsy proven cancers. The similarity of bounding boxes was analyzed using Dice coefficients. An automatic tumor segmentation algorithm was used to segment tumors from the readers' annotations. The segmented tumors were then compared between readers using Dice coefficients as the similarity metric. Cases showing high interobserver variability (average Dice coefficient <0.8) after segmentation were analyzed by a panel of radiologists to identify the reasons causing the low level of agreement. Furthermore, an imaging feature, quantifying tumor and breast tissue enhancement dynamics, was extracted from each segmented tumor for a patient. Pearson's correlation coefficients were computed between the features for each pair of readers to assess the effect of the annotation on the feature values. Finally, the authors quantified the extent of variation in feature values caused by each of the individual reasons for low agreement. Results: The average agreement between readers in terms of the overlap (Dice coefficient) of the bounding box was 0.60. Automatic segmentation of tumor improved the average Dice coefficient for 92% of the cases to the average value of 0.77. The mean agreement between readers expressed by the correlation coefficient for the imaging feature was 0.96. Conclusions: There is a moderate variability between readers when identifying the rectangular outline of breast tumors on MRI. This variability is alleviated by the automatic segmentation of the tumors. Furthermore, the moderate interobserver variability in terms of the bounding box does not translate into a considerable variability in terms of assessment of enhancement dynamics. The authors propose some additional ways to further reduce the interobserver variability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Physical phantoms are essential for the development, optimization, and evaluation of x-ray breast imaging systems. Recognizing the major effect of anatomy on image quality and clinical performance, such phantoms should ideally reflect the three-dimensional structure of the human breast. Currently, there is no commercially available three-dimensional physical breast phantom that is anthropomorphic. The authors present the development of a new suite of physical breast phantoms based on human data. Methods: The phantoms were designed to match the extended cardiac-torso virtual breast phantoms that were based on dedicated breast computed tomography images of human subjects. The phantoms were fabricated by high-resolution multimaterial additive manufacturing (3D printing) technology. The glandular equivalency of the photopolymer materials was measured relative to breast tissue-equivalent plastic materials. Based on the current state-of-the-art in the technology and available materials, two variations were fabricated. The first was a dual-material phantom, the Doublet. Fibroglandular tissue and skin were represented by the most radiographically dense material available; adipose tissue was represented by the least radiographically dense material. The second variation, the Singlet, was fabricated with a single material to represent fibroglandular tissue and skin. It was subsequently filled with adipose-equivalent materials including oil, beeswax, and permanent urethane-based polymer. Simulated microcalcification clusters were further included in the phantoms via crushed eggshells. The phantoms were imaged and characterized visually and quantitatively. Results: The mammographic projections and tomosynthesis reconstructed images of the fabricated phantoms yielded realistic breast background. The mammograms of the phantoms demonstrated close correlation with simulated mammographic projection images of the corresponding virtual phantoms. Furthermore, power-law descriptions of the phantom images were in general agreement with real human images. The Singlet approach offered more realistic contrast as compared to the Doublet approach, but at the expense of air bubbles and air pockets that formed during the filling process. Conclusions: The presented physical breast phantoms and their matching virtual breast phantoms offer realistic breast anatomy, patient variability, and ease of use, making them a potential candidate for performing both system quality control testing and virtual clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Mammography is the most widely accepted and utilized screening modality for early breast cancer detection. Providing high quality mammography education to radiology trainees is essential, since excellent interpretation skills are needed to ensure the highest benefit of screening mammography for patients. The authors have previously proposed a computer-aided education system based on trainee models. Those models relate human-assessed image characteristics to trainee error. In this study, the authors propose to build trainee models that utilize features automatically extracted from images using computer vision algorithms to predict likelihood of missing each mass by the trainee. This computer vision-based approach to trainee modeling will allow for automatically searching large databases of mammograms in order to identify challenging cases for each trainee. Methods: The authors' algorithm for predicting the likelihood of missing a mass consists of three steps. First, a mammogram is segmented into air, pectoral muscle, fatty tissue, dense tissue, and mass using automated segmentation algorithms. Second, 43 features are extracted using computer vision algorithms for each abnormality identified by experts. Third, error-making models (classifiers) are applied to predict the likelihood of trainees missing the abnormality based on the extracted features. The models are developed individually for each trainee using his/her previous reading data. The authors evaluated the predictive performance of the proposed algorithm using data from a reader study in which 10 subjects (7 residents and 3 novices) and 3 experts read 100 mammographic cases. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology was applied for the evaluation. Results: The average area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the error-making models for the task of predicting which masses will be detected and which will be missed was 0.607 (95% CI,0.564-0.650). This value was statistically significantly different from 0.5 (p < 0.0001). For the 7 residents only, the AUC performance of the models was 0.590 (95% CI,0.537-0.642) and was also significantly higher than 0.5 (p = 0.0009). Therefore, generally the authors' models were able to predict which masses were detected and which were missed better than chance. Conclusions: The authors proposed an algorithm that was able to predict which masses will be detected and which will be missed by each individual trainee. This confirms existence of error-making patterns in the detection of masses among radiology trainees. Furthermore, the proposed methodology will allow for the optimized selection of difficult cases for the trainees in an automatic and efficient manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The use of contrast agents in breast imaging has the capability of enhancing nodule detectability and providing physiological information. Accordingly, there has been a growing trend toward using iodine as a contrast medium in digital mammography (DM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT). Widespread use raises concerns about the best way to use iodine in DM and DBT, and thus a comparison is necessary to evaluate typical iodine-enhanced imaging methods. This study used a task-based observer model to determine the optimal imaging approach by analyzing six imaging paradigms in terms of their ability to resolve iodine at a given dose: unsubtracted mammography and tomosynthesis, temporal subtraction mammography and tomosynthesis, and dual energy subtraction mammography and tomosynthesis. Methods: Imaging performance was characterized using a detectability index d, derived from the system task transfer function (TTF), an imaging task, iodine signal difference, and the noise power spectrum (NPS). The task modeled a 10 mm diameter lesion containing iodine concentrations between 2.1 mg/cc and 8.6 mg/cc. TTF was obtained using an edge phantom, and the NPS was measured over several exposure levels, energies, and target-filter combinations. Using a structured CIRS phantom, d was generated as a function of dose and iodine concentration. Results: For all iodine concentrations and dose, temporal subtraction techniques for mammography and tomosynthesis yielded the highest d, while dual energy techniques for both modalities demonstrated the next best performance. Unsubtracted imaging resulted in the lowest d values for both modalities, with unsubtracted mammography performing the worst out of all six paradigms. Conclusions: At any dose, temporal subtraction imaging provides the greatest detectability, with temporally subtracted DBT performing the highest. The authors attribute the successful performance to excellent cancellation of inplane structures and improved signal difference in the lesion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) features as predictors of individual errors made by trainees when detecting masses in mammograms. Methods: Ten radiology trainees and three expert breast imagers reviewed 100 mammograms comprised of bilateral medial lateral oblique and craniocaudal views on a research workstation. The cases consisted of normal and biopsy proven benign and malignant masses. For cases with actionable abnormalities, the experts recorded breast (density and axillary lymph nodes) and mass (shape, margin, and density) features according to the BI-RADS lexicon, as well as the abnormality location (depth and clock face). For each trainee, a user-specific multivariate model was constructed to predict the trainee's likelihood of error based on BI-RADS features. The performance of the models was assessed using area under the receive operating characteristic curves (AUC). Results: Despite the variability in errors between different trainees, the individual models were able to predict the likelihood of error for the trainees with a mean AUC of 0.611 (range: 0.502-0.739, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.543-0.680, p < 0.002). Conclusions: Patterns in detection errors for mammographic masses made by radiology trainees can be modeled using BI-RADS features. These findings may have potential implications for the development of future educational materials that are personalized to individual trainees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Mammography is known to be one of the most difficult radiographic exams to interpret. Mammography has important limitations, including the superposition of normal tissue that can obscure a mass, chance alignment of normal tissue to mimic a true lesion and the inability to derive volumetric information. It has been shown that stereomammography can overcome these deficiencies by showing that layers of normal tissue lay at different depths. If standard stereomammography (i.e., a single stereoscopic pair consisting of two projection images) can significantly improve lesion detection, how will multiview stereoscopy (MVS), where many projection images are used, compare to mammography? The aim of this study was to assess the relative performance of MVS compared to mammography for breast mass detection. Methods: The MVS image sets consisted of the 25 raw projection images acquired over an arc of approximately 45° using a Siemens prototype breast tomosynthesis system. The mammograms were acquired using a commercial Siemens FFDM system. The raw data were taken from both of these systems for 27 cases and realistic simulated mass lesions were added to duplicates of the 27 images at the same local contrast. The images with lesions (27 mammography and 27 MVS) and the images without lesions (27 mammography and 27 MVS) were then postprocessed to provide comparable and representative image appearance across the two modalities. All 108 image sets were shown to five full-time breast imaging radiologists in random order on a state-of-the-art stereoscopic display. The observers were asked to give a confidence rating for each image (0 for lesion definitely not present, 100 for lesion definitely present). The ratings were then compiled and processed using ROC and variance analysis. Results: The mean AUC for the five observers was 0.614±0.055 for mammography and 0.778±0.052 for multiview stereoscopy. The difference of 0.164±0.065 was statistically significant with a p-value of 0.0148. Conclusions: The differences in the AUCs and the p-value suggest that multiview stereoscopy has a statistically significant advantage over mammography in the detection of simulated breast masses. This highlights the dominance of anatomical noise compared to quantum noise for breast mass detection. It also shows that significant lesion detection can be achieved with MVS without any of the artifacts associated with tomosynthesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]