Search

Background Adaptive control processing for mammography (ACM) is a novel program that automatically sets up appropriate image-processing parameters for individual mammograms (MMGs) by analyzing the focal and whole breast histogram. Purpose To investigate whether ACM improves the image contrast of digital MMGs and whether it improves radiologists' diagnostic performance in reading of MMGs. Material and Methods One hundred normal cases for image quality assessment and another 100 cases (50 normal and 50 cancers) for observer performance assessment were enrolled. All mammograms were examined with and without ACM. Five radiologists assessed the intra- and extra-mammary contrast of 100 normal MMGs, and the mean scores of the intra- and extra-mammary contrast were compared between MMGs with and without ACM in both the dense and non-dense group. They classified 100 MMGs into BI-RADS categories 1-5, and were asked to rate the images on a scale of 0 to 100 for the likelihood of the presence of category 3-5 lesions in each breast. Detectability of breast cancer, reading time, and frequency of window adjustment were compared between MMGs with and without ACM. Results ACM improved the intra-mammary contrast in both the dense and non-dense group but degraded extra-mammary contrast in the dense group. There was no significant difference in detectability of breast cancer between MMGs with and without ACM. Frequency of window adjustment without ACM was significantly higher than that with ACM. Reading time without ACM was significantly longer than that with ACM. Conclusion ACM improves the image contrast of MMGs and shortens reading time.

Purpose: We investigated possible correlations between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and prognostic factors of breast cancer., Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 81 patients who underwent magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the breast and were diagnosed pathologically with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) not otherwise specified with invasive foci one cm or larger. We excluded ductal carcinoma in situ and IDC with invasive foci smaller than one cm because small lesions decrease the reliability of signal intensity of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). We also excluded special type cancers. We used t-test to compare the mean ADC values of cancers of Stage pT1 (≤2 cm) versus pT2 or 3 (>2 cm), cancers with versus without vascular invasion, axillary lymph node (N)-positive versus N-negative cancers, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive versus ER-negative cancers, and progesterone receptor (PgR)-positive versus PgR-negative cancers. We analyzed correlations between the ADC value with nuclear grade (NG) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) score by rank test using Spearman's correlation coefficient., Results: The mean ADC value was significantly higher for N-positive (n=28; 0.97 ± 0.20 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) than N-negative cancers (n=53; 0.87 ± 0.17 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) (P=0.017); significantly lower for ER-positive (n=63; 0.88 ± 0.15 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) than ER-negative cancers (n=18; 1.01 ± 0.21 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) (P=0.005); and significantly lower for PgR-positive (n=47; 0.88 ± 0.16 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) than PgR-negative cancers (n=34; 0.95 ± 0.18 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) (P=0.048). Tumor size, vascular invasion, NG, and HER2 status showed no significant correlation with ADC values., Conclusion: ADC values were higher for N-positive and ER-negative breast cancers than N-negative and ER-positive cancers.

Breast magnetic resonance imagings (MRIs) including diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) of 110 breast cancers (26 with pathologically proven axillary node metastasis and 84 without metastasis) were retrospectively studied. Axillary nodes were detected as high-signal-intensity areas on DWI in 71 cancers (24 with metastasis and 47 without) and not detected in 39 cancers (2 with metastasis and 37 without). The ADC of metastatic nodes was significantly greater than that of the benign ones (1.08 ± 0.18 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s vs. 0.92 ± 0.22 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s, P=.004). When detectability of axillary nodes on DWI and ADC over 1.05 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s was applied as a threshold, 53.8% sensitivity, 86.9% specificity, and 79.1% accuracy were provided., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)