A multicentric study of radiomics and artificial intelligence analysis on contrast-enhanced mammography to identify different histotypes of breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of radiomic analysis on contrast-enhanced mammography images to identify different histotypes of breast cancer mainly in order to predict grading, to identify hormone receptors, to discriminate human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and to identify luminal histotype of the breast cancer. METHODS: From four Italian centers were recruited 180 malignant lesions and 68 benign lesions. However, only the malignant lesions were considered for the analysis. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced mammography in cranium caudal (CC) and medium lateral oblique (MLO) view. Considering histological findings as the ground truth, four outcomes were considered: (1) G1 + G2 vs. G3; (2) HER2 + vs. HER2 - ; (3) HR + vs. HR - ; and (4) non-luminal vs. luminal A or HR + /HER2- and luminal B or HR + /HER2 + . For multivariate analysis feature selection, balancing techniques and patter recognition approaches were considered. RESULTS: The univariate findings showed that the diagnostic performance is low for each outcome, while the results of the multivariate analysis showed that better performances can be obtained. In the HER2 + detection, the best performance (73% of accuracy and AUC = 0.77) was obtained using a linear regression model (LRM) with 12 features extracted by MLO view. In the HR + detection, the best performance (77% of accuracy and AUC = 0.80) was obtained using a LRM with 14 features extracted by MLO view. In grading classification, the best performance was obtained by a decision tree trained with three predictors extracted by MLO view reaching an accuracy of 82% on validation set. In the luminal versus non-luminal histotype classification, the best performance was obtained by a bagged tree trained with 15 predictors extracted by CC view reaching an accuracy of 94% on validation set. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that radiomics analysis can be effectively applied to design a tool to support physician decision making in breast cancer classification. In particular, the classification of luminal versus non-luminal histotypes can be performed with high accuracy.

Radiomics and artificial intelligence analysis by T2-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to predict Breast Cancer Histological Outcome.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of radiomics features obtained by MR images to predict Breast Cancer Histological Outcome. METHODS: A total of 217 patients with malignant lesions were analysed underwent MRI examinations. Considering histological findings as the ground truth, four different types of findings were used in both univariate and multivariate analyses: (1) G1 + G2 vs G3 classification; (2) presence of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2 + vs HER2 -); (3) presence of the hormone receptor (HR + vs HR -); and (4) presence of luminal subtypes of breast cancer. RESULTS: The best accuracy for discriminating HER2 + versus HER2 - breast cancers was obtained considering nine predictors by early phase T1-weighted subtraction images and a decision tree (accuracy of 88% on validation set). The best accuracy for discriminating HR + versus HR - breast cancers was obtained considering nine predictors by T2-weighted subtraction images and a decision tree (accuracy of 90% on validation set). The best accuracy for discriminating G1 + G2 versus G3 breast cancers was obtained considering 16 predictors by early phase T1-weighted subtraction images in a linear regression model with an accuracy of 75%. The best accuracy for discriminating luminal versus non-luminal breast cancers was obtained considering 27 predictors by early phase T1-weighted subtraction images and a decision tree (accuracy of 94% on validation set). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of radiomics analysis and artificial intelligence techniques could be used to support physician decision-making in prediction of Breast Cancer Histological Outcome.

US-Elastography for Breast Lesion Characterization: Prospective Comparison of US BIRADS, Strain Elastography and Shear wave Elastography.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of strain elastography (SE) and 2 D shear wave elastography (SWE) and SE/SWE combination in comparison with conventional multiparametric ultrasound (US) with respect to improving BI-RADS classification results and differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions using a qualitative and quantitative assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 130 histologically proven breast masses were evaluated with baseline US, color Doppler ultrasound (CDUS), SE and SWE (Toshiba Aplio 500 with a 7-15 MHz wide-band linear transducer). Each lesion was classified according to the BIRADS lexicon by evaluating the size, the B-mode and color Doppler features, the SE qualitative (point color scale) and SE semi-quantitative (strain ratio) methods, and quantitative SWE. Histological results were compared with BIRADS, strain ratio (SR) and shear wave elastography (SWE) all performed by one investigator blinded to the clinical examination and mammographic results at the time of the US examination. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the diagnostic performance of B-mode US, SE, SWE, and their combination. RESULTS: Histological examination revealed 47 benign and 83 malignant breast lesions. The accuracy of SR was statistically significantly higher than SWE (sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 89.2 %, 76.6 % and 0.83 for SR and 72.3 %, 66.0 % and 0.69 for SWE, respectively, p = 0.003) but not higher than B-mode US (B-mode US sensitivity, specificity and AUC were 85.5 %, 78.8 %, 0.821, respectively, p = 1.000). CONCLUSION: Our experience suggests that conventional US in combination with both SE and SWE is a valid tool that can be useful in the clinical setting, can improve BIRADS category assessment and may help in the differentiation of benign from malignant breast lesions, with SE having higher accuracy than SWE.

Diagnostic imaging and CEUS findings in a rare case of Desmoid-type fibromatosis. A case report.

Desmoid-type fibromatosis (DF), also known as aggressive fibromatosis, is a locally aggressive benign fibroblastic neoplasm that can infiltrate or recur but cannot metastasize. It is rare, with an estimated annual incidence of two to four new cases per million people. Most DFs occur sporadically, but it may also be associated with the hereditary syndrome familial adenomatous polyposis. Treatment is necessary when the disease is symptomatic, especially in case of compression of critical structures. When possible, surgical resection is the treatment of choice; however, recurrence is common. Due to the high rate of recurrence, imaging plays an important role not only in diagnosis, but also in the management of DF. Although there are a number of studies describing CT and MRI findings of DF, there is no description of contrast-enhanced ultrasound findings.

Automated classification of focal breast lesions according to S-detect: validation and role as a clinical and teaching tool.

PURPOSE: To assess the diagnostic performance and the potential as a teaching tool of S-detect in the assessment of focal breast lesions. METHODS: 61 patients (age 21-84 years) with benign breast lesions in follow-up or candidate to pathological sampling or with suspicious lesions candidate to biopsy were enrolled. The study was based on a prospective and on a retrospective phase. In the prospective phase, after completion of baseline US by an experienced breast radiologist and S-detect assessment, 5 operators with different experience and dedication to breast radiology performed elastographic exams. In the retrospective phase, the 5 operators performed a retrospective assessment and categorized lesions with BI-RADS 2013 lexicon. Integration of S-detect to in-training operators evaluations was performed by giving priority to S-detect analysis in case of disagreement. 2 × 2 contingency tables and ROC analysis were used to assess the diagnostic performances; inter-rater agreement was measured with Cohen's k; Bonferroni's test was used to compare performances. A significance threshold of p = 0.05 was adopted. RESULTS: All operators showed sensitivity > 90% and varying specificity (50-75%); S-detect showed sensitivity > 90 and 70.8% specificity, with inter-rater agreement ranging from moderate to good. Lower specificities were improved by the addition of S-detect. The addition of elastography did not lead to any improvement of the diagnostic performance. CONCLUSIONS: S-detect is a feasible tool for the characterization of breast lesions; it has a potential as a teaching tool for the less experienced operators.