AI-enhanced simultaneous multiparametric 18F-FDG PET/MRI for accurate breast cancer diagnosis.

PURPOSE: To assess whether a radiomics and machine learning (ML) model combining quantitative parameters and radiomics features extracted from simultaneous multiparametric 18F-FDG PET/MRI can discriminate between benign and malignant breast lesions. METHODS: A population of 102 patients with 120 breast lesions (101 malignant and 19 benign) detected on ultrasound and/or mammography was prospectively enrolled. All patients underwent hybrid 18F-FDG PET/MRI for diagnostic purposes. Quantitative parameters were extracted from DCE (MTT, VD, PF), DW (mean ADC of breast lesions and contralateral breast parenchyma), PET (SUVmax, SUVmean, and SUVminimum of breast lesions, as well as SUVmean of the contralateral breast parenchyma), and T2-weighted images. Radiomics features were extracted from DCE, T2-weighted, ADC, and PET images. Different diagnostic models were developed using a fine Gaussian support vector machine algorithm which explored different combinations of quantitative parameters and radiomics features to obtain the highest accuracy in discriminating between benign and malignant breast lesions using fivefold cross-validation. The performance of the best radiomics and ML model was compared with that of expert reader review using McNemar's test. RESULTS: Eight radiomics models were developed. The integrated model combining MTT and ADC with radiomics features extracted from PET and ADC images obtained the highest accuracy for breast cancer diagnosis (AUC 0.983), although its accuracy was not significantly higher than that of expert reader review (AUC 0.868) (p = 0.508). CONCLUSION: A radiomics and ML model combining quantitative parameters and radiomics features extracted from simultaneous multiparametric 18F-FDG PET/MRI images can accurately discriminate between benign and malignant breast lesions.

Impact of the Kaiser score on clinical decision-making in BI-RADS 4 mammographic calcifications examined with breast MRI.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether the application of the Kaiser score for breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) might downgrade breast lesions that present as mammographic calcifications and avoid unnecessary breast biopsies METHODS: This IRB-approved, retrospective, cross-sectional, single-center study included 167 consecutive patients with suspicious mammographic calcifications and histopathologically verified results. These patients underwent a pre-interventional breast MRI exam for further diagnostic assessment before vacuum-assisted stereotactic-guided biopsy (95 malignant and 72 benign lesions). Two breast radiologists with different levels of experience independently read all examinations using the Kaiser score, a machine learning-derived clinical decision-making tool that provides probabilities of malignancy by a formalized combination of diagnostic criteria. Diagnostic performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis and inter-reader agreement by the calculation of Cohen's kappa coefficients. RESULTS: Application of the Kaiser score revealed a large area under the ROC curve (0.859-0.889). Rule-out criteria, with high sensitivity, were applied to mass and non-mass lesions alike. The rate of potentially avoidable breast biopsies ranged between 58.3 and 65.3%, with the lowest rate observed with the least experienced reader. CONCLUSIONS: Applying the Kaiser score to breast MRI allows stratifying the risk of breast cancer in lesions that present as suspicious calcifications on mammography and may thus avoid unnecessary breast biopsies. KEY POINTS: • The Kaiser score is a helpful clinical decision tool for distinguishing malignant from benign breast lesions that present as calcifications on mammography. • Application of the Kaiser score may obviate 58.3-65.3% of unnecessary stereotactic biopsies of suspicious calcifications. • High Kaiser scores predict breast cancer with high specificity, aiding clinical decision-making with regard to re-biopsy in case of negative results.

[Contrast agent-free breast MRI : Advantages and potential disadvantages]. / Kontrastmittelfreie Mamma-MRT : Vorteile und potenzielle Nachteile.

BACKGROUND: Contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive method for detection of breast cancer. The further spread of breast MRI is limited by the complicated examination procedure and the need for intravenously administered contrast media. OBJECTIVES: Can diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) replace contrast-enhanced sequences to achieve an unenhanced breast MRI examination? MATERIALS AND METHODS: Narrative review and meta-analytic assessment of previously published studies. RESULTS: DWI can visualize breast lesions and distinguish benign from malignant findings. It is thus a valid alternative to contrast-enhanced sequences. As an additional technique, the use of DWI can reduce the numbers of unnecessary breast biopsies. The lack of robustness leading to variable sensitivity that is currently lower than that of contrast-enhanced breast MRI is a disadvantage of DWI. CONCLUSIONS: Presently, DWI can be recommended as an integral part of clinical breast MRI protocols. The application as a stand-alone technique within unenhanced protocols is still under evaluation.

Inter- and intra-observer agreement of BI-RADS-based subjective visual estimation of amount of fibroglandular breast tissue with magnetic resonance imaging: comparison to automated quantitative assessment.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the inter-/intra-observer agreement of BI-RADS-based subjective visual estimation of the amount of fibroglandular tissue (FGT) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and to investigate whether FGT assessment benefits from an automated, observer-independent, quantitative MRI measurement by comparing both approaches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty women with no imaging abnormalities (BI-RADS 1 and 2) were included in this institutional review board (IRB)-approved prospective study. All women underwent un-enhanced breast MRI. Four radiologists independently assessed FGT with MRI by subjective visual estimation according to BI-RADS. Automated observer-independent quantitative measurement of FGT with MRI was performed using a previously described measurement system. Inter-/intra-observer agreements of qualitative and quantitative FGT measurements were assessed using Cohen's kappa (k). RESULTS: Inexperienced readers achieved moderate inter-/intra-observer agreement and experienced readers a substantial inter- and perfect intra-observer agreement for subjective visual estimation of FGT. Practice and experience reduced observer-dependency. Automated observer-independent quantitative measurement of FGT was successfully performed and revealed only fair to moderate agreement (k = 0.209-0.497) with subjective visual estimations of FGT. CONCLUSION: Subjective visual estimation of FGT with MRI shows moderate intra-/inter-observer agreement, which can be improved by practice and experience. Automated observer-independent quantitative measurements of FGT are necessary to allow a standardized risk evaluation. KEY POINTS: • Subjective FGT estimation with MRI shows moderate intra-/inter-observer agreement in inexperienced readers. • Inter-observer agreement can be improved by practice and experience. • Automated observer-independent quantitative measurements can provide reliable and standardized assessment of FGT with MRI.

Fat saturation in dynamic breast MRI at 3 Tesla: is the Dixon technique superior to spectral fat saturation? A visual grading characteristics study.

PURPOSE: To intra-individually compare the diagnostic image quality of Dixon and spectral fat suppression at 3 T. METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients (mean age 55.1 years) undergoing 3 T breast MRI were recruited for this prospective study. The image protocol included pre-contrast and delayed post-contrast spectral and Dixon fat-suppressed T1w series. Two independent blinded readers compared spectral and Dixon fat-suppressed series by evaluating six ordinal (1 worst to 5 best) image quality criteria (image quality, delineation of anatomical structures, fat suppression in the breast and axilla, lesion delineation and internal enhancement). Breast density and size were assessed. Data analysis included Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis. RESULTS: Four examinations were excluded; 48 examinations in 46 patients were evaluated. In VGC analysis, the Dixon technique was superior regarding image quality criteria analysed (P < 0.01). Smaller breast size and lower breast density were significantly (P < 0.01) correlated with impaired spectral fat suppression quality. No such correlation was identified for the Dixon technique, which showed reconstruction-based water-fat mixups leading to insufficient image quality in 20.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The Dixon technique outperformed spectral fat suppression in all evaluated criteria (P < 0.01). Non-diagnostic examinations can be avoided by fat and water image reconstruction. The superior image quality of the Dixon technique can improve breast MRI interpretation. KEY POINTS: Optimal fat suppression quality is necessary for optimal image interpretation. Superior fat suppression quality is achieved using the Dixon technique. Lesion margin and internal enhancement evaluation improves using the Dixon technique. Superior image quality of the Dixon technique improves breast MRI interpretation.

Using the Kaiser Score as a clinical decision rule for breast lesion classification: Does computer-assisted curve type analysis improve diagnosis?

PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate the effect of using visual or automatic enhancement curve type assessment on the diagnostic performance of the Kaiser Score (KS), a clinical decision rule for breast MRI. METHOD: This IRB-approved retrospective study analyzed consecutive conventional BI-RADS 0, 4 or 5 patients who underwent biopsy after 1.5T breast MRI according to EUSOBI recommendations between 2013 and 2015. The KS includes five criteria (spiculations; signal intensity (SI)-time curve type; margins of the lesion; internal enhancement; and presence of edema) resulting in scores from 1 (=lowest) to 11 (=highest risk of breast cancer). Enhancement curve types (Persistent, Plateau or Wash-out) were assessed by two radiologists independently visually and using a pixel-wise color-coded computed parametric map of curve types. KS diagnostic performance differences between readings were compared by ROC analysis. RESULTS: In total 220 lesions (147 benign, 73 malignant) including mass (n = 148) and non-mass lesions (n = 72) were analyzed. KS reading performance in distinguishing benign from malignant lesions did not differ between visual analysis and parametric map (P = 0.119; visual: AUC 0.875, sensitivity 95 %, specificity 63 %; and map: AUC 0.901, sensitivity 97 %, specificity 65 %). Additionally, analyzing mass and non-mass lesions separately, showed no difference between parametric map based and visual curve type-based KS analysis as well (P = 0.130 and P = 0.787). CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the Kaiser Score is largely independent of the curve type assessment methodology, confirming its robustness as a clinical decision rule for breast MRI in any type of breast lesion in clinical routine.

Enhancing the Kaiser score for lesion characterization in unenhanced breast MRI.

PURPOSE: To adapt the methodology of the Kaiser score, a clinical decision rule for lesion characterization in breast MRI, for unenhanced protocols. METHOD: In this retrospective IRB-approved cross-sectional study, we included 93 consecutive patients who underwent breast MRI between 2021 and 2023 for further work-up of BI-RADS 0, 3-5 in conventional imaging or for staging purposes (BI-RADS 6). All patients underwent biopsy for histologic verification or were followed for a minimum of 12 months. MRI scans were conducted using 1.5 T or 3 T scanners using dedicated breast coils and a protocol in line with international recommendations including DWI and ADC. Lesion characterization relied solely on T2w and DWI/ADC-derived features (such as lesion type, margins, shape, internal signal, surrounding tissue findings, ADC value). Statistical analysis was done using decision tree analysis aiming to distinguish benign (histology/follow-up) from malignant outcomes. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 161 lesions (81 of them non-mass) with a malignancy rate of 40%. Lesion margins (spiculated, irregular, or circumscribed) were identified as the most important criterion within the decision tree, followed by the ADC value as second most important criterion. The resulting score demonstrated a strong diagnostic performance with an AUC of 0.840, providing both rule-in and rule-out criteria. In an independent test set of 65 lesions the diagnostic performance was verified by two readers (AUC 0.77 and 0.87, kappa: 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a clinical decision rule for unenhanced breast MRI including lesion margins and ADC value as the most important criteria, achieving high diagnostic accuracy.

How much can abbreviated protocols for breast MRI increase patient throughput? a multi-centric evaluation.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of abbreviated breast MRI protocols on patient throughput considering non-scanning time and differences between in- and out-of-hospital settings. MATERIALS & METHODS: A total of 143 breast MRI exams from four study sites (hospital, three radiology centers) were included in this retrospective study. Total exam time (TET), Table Time (TT), Scan Time (ST), Table Switch Time (TST) and Planning Time (PT) were determined from consecutive breast MRI examinations. Possible number of scans and exams per hour were calculated. Four scan protocols were compared: full diagnostic protocol (n = 34, hospital), split dynamic protocol (n = 109, all sites) and two abbreviated protocols (n = 109, calculated, all sites). Data were described as median and interquartile range (IQR) and compared by Mann-Whitney-U-Test. RESULTS: Non-scanning time increased from 50% to 74% of the TET with a TST of 46% and a PT of 28% in the shortest abbreviated protocol. Number of possible scans per hour increased from 4.7 to 18.8 while number of possible exams per hour only increased from 2.3 to 5.1. Absolute TST (4.7 vs. 5.7 min, p = 0.46) and TET (18 min each, p = 0.35) did not differ significantly between in- and out-of-hospital exams. Absolute (4.4 vs. 2.8 min, p < 0.001) and relative (23 vs. 13%, p < 0.001) PT and TT (13.3 vs. 11.5 min, p = 0.004) was longer and relative TST (27% vs. 34%, p = 0.047) was shorter in hospital. CONCLUSION: TST and PT significantly contribute to TET and challenge the effectiveness of abbreviated protocols for increasing patient throughput. These findings show only low setting-dependent differences.