+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Diffusion-Weighted Imaging With Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Mapping for Breast Cancer Detection as a Stand-Alone Parameter: Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Diffusion-Weighted Imaging With Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Mapping for Breast Cancer Detection as a Stand-Alone Parameter: Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Investigative Radiology 53(10): 587-595

The aims of this study were to compare dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with apparent diffusion coefficient mapping as a stand-alone parameter without any other supportive sequence for breast cancer detection and to assess its combination as multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the breast. In this institutional review board-approved single-center study, prospectively acquired data of 106 patients who underwent breast MRI from 12/2010 to 09/2014 for an imaging abnormality (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 0, 4/5) were retrospectively analyzed. Four readers independently assessed DWI and DCE as well as combined as mpMRI. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories, lesion size, and mean apparent diffusion coefficient values were recorded. Histopathology was used as the gold standard. Appropriate statistical tests were used to compare diagnostic values. There were 69 malignant and 41 benign tumors in 106 patients. Four patients presented with bilateral lesions. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI was the most sensitive test for breast cancer detection, with an average sensitivity of 100%. Diffusion-weighted imaging alone was less sensitive (82%; P < 0.001) but more specific than DCE-MRI (86.8% vs 76.6%; P = 0.002). Diagnostic accuracy was 83.7% for DWI and 90.6% for DCE-MRI. Multiparametric MRI achieved a sensitivity of 96.8%, not statistically different from DCE-MRI (P = 0.12) and with a similar specificity as DWI (83.8%; P = 0.195), maximizing diagnostic accuracy to 91.9%. There was almost perfect interreader agreement for DWI (κ = 0.864) and DCE-MRI (κ = 0.875) for differentiation of benign and malignant lesions. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI is most sensitive for breast cancer detection and thus still indispensable. Multiparametric MRI using DCE-MRI and DWI maintains a high sensitivity, increases specificity, and maximizes diagnostic accuracy, often preventing unnecessary breast biopsies. Diffusion-weighted imaging should not be used as a stand-alone parameter because it detects significantly fewer cancers in comparison with DCE-MRI and mpMRI.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 058423287

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 29620604

DOI: 10.1097/rli.0000000000000465

Related references

Detection of prostate cancer with magnetic resonance imaging: optimization of T1-weighted, T2-weighted, dynamic-enhanced T1-weighted, diffusion-weighted imaging apparent diffusion coefficient mapping sequences and MR spectroscopy, correlated with biopsy and histopathological findings. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 36(1): 30-45, 2012

Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the detection and localization of prostate cancer: combination of T2-weighted, dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging. Bju International 107(9): 1411-1418, 2011

Improved diagnostic accuracy with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the breast using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, and 3-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. Investigative Radiology 49(6): 421-430, 2014

Effects of contrast-enhancement on diffusion weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in 3-T magnetic resonance imaging of breast lesions. Acta Radiologica 59(8): 902-908, 2018

Accuracy of combined dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging for breast cancer detection: a meta-analysis. Acta Radiologica 57(6): 651-660, 2016

Potential of Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Characterization of Breast Lesions: Intraindividual Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Investigative Radiology 53(4): 229-235, 2018

Combined contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance and diffusion-weighted imaging reading adapted to the "Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System" for multiparametric 3-T imaging of breast lesions. European Radiology 23(7): 1791-1802, 2013

Brain tumors: a multimodality approach with diffusion-weighted imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, dynamic susceptibility contrast and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America 21(2): 199-239, 2013

Role of diffusion weighted imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy in breast cancer patients with indeterminate dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging findings. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 61: 66-72, 2019

Comparison of apparent diffusion coefficient in diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and morphological assessment of breast tumors. Polish Journal of Pathology 67(4): 398-403, 2016

Application of apparent diffusion coefficient and exponent apparent diffusion coefficient values in magnetic resonance imaging diffusion-weighted imaging to differentiate benign and malignant ovarian epithelial tumors. Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics 12(1): 401-405, 2016

Evaluation of the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer using diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Neoplasma 64(3): 430-436, 2017

Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer detection: Preliminary results on quantitative analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging and spectroscopy imaging. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 34(7): 839-845, 2016

Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for predicting the response of locally advanced breast cancer to neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Imaging 5(1): 011011, 2018

Detection of non-palpable breast cancer in asymptomatic women by using unenhanced diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted MR imaging: comparison with mammography and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. European Radiology 21(1): 11-17, 2011