Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 4/2016

01-04-2016 | Breast

Clinical utility of dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast microcalcifications without associated mass: a preliminary analysis

Authors: Yun-Chung Cheung, Hsiu-Pei Tsai, Yung-Feng Lo, Shir-Hwa Ueng, Pei-Chin Huang, Shin-Chih Chen

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 4/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To assess the utility of dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (DE-CESM) for evaluation of suspicious malignant microcalcifications.

Methods

Two hundred and fifty-six DE-CESMs were reviewed from 2012–2013, 59 cases fulfilled the following criteria and were enrolled for analysis: (1) suspicious malignant microcalcifications (BI-RADS 4) on mammogram, (2) no related mass, (3) with pathological diagnoses. The microcalcification morphology and associated enhancement were reviewed to analyse the accuracy of the diagnosis and cancer size measurements versus the results of pathology.

Results

Of the 59 microcalcifications, 22 were diagnosed as cancers, 19 were atypical lesions and 18 were benign lesions. Twenty (76.9 %) cancers, three (11.55 %) atypia and three (11.55 %) benign lesions revealed enhancement. The true-positive rate of intermediate- and high-concern microcalcifications was significantly higher than that of low-concern lesions (93.75 % vs. 50 %). Overall, the diagnostic sensitivity of enhancement was 90.9 %, with 83.78 % specificity, 76.92 % positive predictive value, 93.94 % negative predictive value and 86.4 % accuracy. Performance was good (AUC = 0.87) according to a ROC curve and cancer size correlation with a mean difference of 0.05 cm on a Bland-Altman plot.

Conclusions

DE-CESM provides additional enhancement information for diagnosing breast microcalcifications and measuring cancer sizes with high correlation to surgicohistology.

Key Points

DE-CESM provides additional enhancement information for diagnosing suspicious breast microcalcifications.
The enhanced cancer size closely correlates to microscopy by Bland-Altman plot.
DE-CESM could be considered for evaluation of suspicious malignant microcalcifications.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kettritz U, Rotter K, Schreer I et al (2004) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in 2874 patients. Cancer 100:245–251CrossRefPubMed Kettritz U, Rotter K, Schreer I et al (2004) Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in 2874 patients. Cancer 100:245–251CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Liberman EA, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD (1998) The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:35–40CrossRefPubMed Liberman EA, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD (1998) The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:35–40CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC (1999) BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 211:845–850CrossRefPubMed Orel SG, Kay N, Reynolds C, Sullivan DC (1999) BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology 211:845–850CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Burnside ES, Ochsner JE, Fowler KJ et al (2007) Use of microcalcification descriptors in BI-RADS 4th edition to stratify risk of malignancy. Radiology 242:388–395CrossRefPubMed Burnside ES, Ochsner JE, Fowler KJ et al (2007) Use of microcalcification descriptors in BI-RADS 4th edition to stratify risk of malignancy. Radiology 242:388–395CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Bent CK, Bassett LW, D’Orsi CJ, Sayre JW (2010) The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1378–1383CrossRefPubMed Bent CK, Bassett LW, D’Orsi CJ, Sayre JW (2010) The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1378–1383CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Kopans DB (2014) Digital breast tomosynthesis from concept to clinical care. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:299–308CrossRefPubMed Kopans DB (2014) Digital breast tomosynthesis from concept to clinical care. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:299–308CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Michell MJ, Iqbal A, Wasan RK et al (2012) Comparison of accuracy of film-screen mammography, fill-field digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis. Clin Radiol 67:976–981CrossRefPubMed Michell MJ, Iqbal A, Wasan RK et al (2012) Comparison of accuracy of film-screen mammography, fill-field digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis. Clin Radiol 67:976–981CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Wallis MG, Moa E, Zanca F, Leifland K, Danielsson M (2012) Two-view and single-view tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: high-resolution X-ray imaging observer study. Radiology 262:788–796CrossRefPubMed Wallis MG, Moa E, Zanca F, Leifland K, Danielsson M (2012) Two-view and single-view tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: high-resolution X-ray imaging observer study. Radiology 262:788–796CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Dromain C, Thibault F, Diekmann F et al (2012) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study. Breast Cancer Res 14:R94CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dromain C, Thibault F, Diekmann F et al (2012) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study. Breast Cancer Res 14:R94CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Diekmann F, Freyer M, Diekmann S et al (2011) Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Eur J Radiol 78:112–121CrossRefPubMed Diekmann F, Freyer M, Diekmann S et al (2011) Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Eur J Radiol 78:112–121CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Cheung YC, Lin YC, Wan YL et al (2014) Diagnostic performance of dual-energy contrast-enhanced subtracted mammography in dense breasts compared to mammography alone: interobserver blind-reading analysis. Eur Radiol 24:2394–2403CrossRefPubMed Cheung YC, Lin YC, Wan YL et al (2014) Diagnostic performance of dual-energy contrast-enhanced subtracted mammography in dense breasts compared to mammography alone: interobserver blind-reading analysis. Eur Radiol 24:2394–2403CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S et al (2011) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol 21:565–574CrossRefPubMed Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S et al (2011) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol 21:565–574CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M et al (2003) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 228:842–850CrossRefPubMed Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M et al (2003) Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 228:842–850CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Jeunehomme F et al (2005) Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement. Investig Radiol 40:397–404CrossRef Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Jeunehomme F et al (2005) Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement. Investig Radiol 40:397–404CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Dromain C, Balleyguier C, Muller S et al (2006) Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of breast carcinoma using contrast enhanced digital mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:W528–W537CrossRefPubMed Dromain C, Balleyguier C, Muller S et al (2006) Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of breast carcinoma using contrast enhanced digital mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:W528–W537CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V et al (2003) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology 229:261–268CrossRefPubMed Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V et al (2003) Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology 229:261–268CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS et al (2013) Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast cancer. Radiology 266:743–751CrossRefPubMed Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS et al (2013) Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast cancer. Radiology 266:743–751CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ et al (2003) MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high- risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:619–626CrossRefPubMed Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ et al (2003) MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high- risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:619–626CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Berg WA (2003) Rationale for a trial of screening breast ultrasound: American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:1225–1228CrossRefPubMed Berg WA (2003) Rationale for a trial of screening breast ultrasound: American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:1225–1228CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E (2005) Applications and literature review of the BI-RADS classification. Eur Radiol 15:1027–1036CrossRefPubMed Obenauer S, Hermann KP, Grabbe E (2005) Applications and literature review of the BI-RADS classification. Eur Radiol 15:1027–1036CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Bazzocchi M, Zuiani C, Panizza P et al (2006) Contrast-enhanced breast MRI in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography: results of a multicenter trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1723–1732CrossRefPubMed Bazzocchi M, Zuiani C, Panizza P et al (2006) Contrast-enhanced breast MRI in patients with suspicious microcalcifications on mammography: results of a multicenter trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1723–1732CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference McGhan LJ, Wasif N, Gray RJ et al (2010) Use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for invasive lobular cancer: good, better, but maybe not the best? Ann Surg Oncol 17:255–262CrossRefPubMed McGhan LJ, Wasif N, Gray RJ et al (2010) Use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for invasive lobular cancer: good, better, but maybe not the best? Ann Surg Oncol 17:255–262CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Wasif N, Garreau J, Terando A, Kirsch D, Mund DF, Giuliano AE (2009) MRI versus ultrasonography and mammography for preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Am Surg 75:970–975PubMed Wasif N, Garreau J, Terando A, Kirsch D, Mund DF, Giuliano AE (2009) MRI versus ultrasonography and mammography for preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Am Surg 75:970–975PubMed
24.
go back to reference Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C (2008) MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 107:1–14CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C (2008) MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 107:1–14CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F et al (2014) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size. Eur Radiol 24:256–264CrossRefPubMed Fallenberg EM, Dromain C, Diekmann F et al (2014) Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography versus MRI: Initial results in the detection of breast cancer and assessment of tumour size. Eur Radiol 24:256–264CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Clinical utility of dual-energy contrast-enhanced spectral mammography for breast microcalcifications without associated mass: a preliminary analysis
Authors
Yun-Chung Cheung
Hsiu-Pei Tsai
Yung-Feng Lo
Shir-Hwa Ueng
Pei-Chin Huang
Shin-Chih Chen
Publication date
01-04-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 4/2016
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3904-z

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

European Radiology 4/2016 Go to the issue