Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research 3/2012

Open Access 01-06-2012 | Research article

Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study

Authors: Clarisse Dromain, Fabienne Thibault, Felix Diekmann, Eva M Fallenberg, Roberta A Jong, Marcia Koomen, R Edward Hendrick, Anne Tardivon, Alicia Toledano

Published in: Breast Cancer Research | Issue 3/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) as an adjunct to mammography (MX) ± ultrasonography (US) with the diagnostic accuracy of MX ± US alone.

Methods

One hundred ten consenting women with 148 breast lesions (84 malignant, 64 benign) underwent two-view dual-energy CEDM in addition to MX and US using a specially modified digital mammography system (Senographe DS, GE Healthcare). Reference standard was histology for 138 lesions and follow-up for 12 lesions. Six radiologists from 4 institutions interpreted the images using high-resolution softcopy workstations. Confidence of presence (5-point scale), probability of cancer (7-point scale), and BI-RADS scores were evaluated for each finding. Sensitivity, specificity and ROC curve areas were estimated for each reader and overall. Visibility of findings on MX ± CEDM and MX ± US was evaluated with a Likert scale.

Results

The average per-lesion sensitivity across all readers was significantly higher for MX ± US ± CEDM than for MX ± US (0.78 vs. 0.71 using BIRADS, p = 0.006). All readers improved their clinical performance and the average area under the ROC curve was significantly superior for MX ± US ± CEDM than for MX ± US ((0.87 vs 0.83, p = 0.045). Finding visibility was similar or better on MX ± CEDM than MX ± US in 80% of cases.

Conclusions

Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography as an adjunct to MX ± US improves diagnostic accuracy compared to MX ± US alone. Addition of iodinated contrast agent to MX facilitates the visualization of breast lesions.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH: Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002, 137: 347-360.CrossRefPubMed Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH: Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002, 137: 347-360.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC, Williamson MR, Gilliland FD, Wiest PW, Kelsey CA, Key CR, Linver MN: Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Radiology. 1998, 209: 511-518.CrossRefPubMed Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC, Williamson MR, Gilliland FD, Wiest PW, Kelsey CA, Key CR, Linver MN: Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Radiology. 1998, 209: 511-518.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Kolb T, Lichy J, Newhouse J: Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002, 225: 165-175. 10.1148/radiol.2251011667.CrossRefPubMed Kolb T, Lichy J, Newhouse J: Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002, 225: 165-175. 10.1148/radiol.2251011667.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Bird RE, Wallace TW, Yankaskas BC: Analysis of cancer missed at screening mammography. Radiology. 1992, 184: 613-617.CrossRefPubMed Bird RE, Wallace TW, Yankaskas BC: Analysis of cancer missed at screening mammography. Radiology. 1992, 184: 613-617.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, Conant EF, Fajardo LL, Bassett L, D'Orsi C, Jong R, Rebner M, Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group: Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group. Diagnostic performance of digital mammography versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005, 353: 1773-1783. 10.1056/NEJMoa052911.CrossRefPubMed Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, Conant EF, Fajardo LL, Bassett L, D'Orsi C, Jong R, Rebner M, Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group: Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group. Diagnostic performance of digital mammography versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005, 353: 1773-1783. 10.1056/NEJMoa052911.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Prionas ND, Lindfors KK, Ray S, Huang SY, Beckett LA, Monsky WL, Boone JM: Contrast-enhanced dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2010, 256: 714-723. 10.1148/radiol.10092311.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Prionas ND, Lindfors KK, Ray S, Huang SY, Beckett LA, Monsky WL, Boone JM: Contrast-enhanced dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2010, 256: 714-723. 10.1148/radiol.10092311.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Hendrick RE: Radiation doses and cancer risks from breast imaging studies. Radiology. 2010, 257: 246-253. 10.1148/radiol.10100570.CrossRefPubMed Hendrick RE: Radiation doses and cancer risks from breast imaging studies. Radiology. 2010, 257: 246-253. 10.1148/radiol.10100570.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference American College of Radiology: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: BI-RADS. 2003, Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 4 American College of Radiology: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: BI-RADS. 2003, Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 4
9.
go back to reference Kuhl CK: Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 1. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology. 2007, 244: 356-378. 10.1148/radiol.2442051620.CrossRefPubMed Kuhl CK: Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 1. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology. 2007, 244: 356-378. 10.1148/radiol.2442051620.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Lee JM, McMahon PM, Kong CY, Kopans DB, Ryan PD, Ozanne EM, Halpern EF, Gazelle GS: Cost-effectiveness of breast MR imaging and screen-film mammography for screening BRCA1 gene mutation carriers. Radiology. 2010, 254: 793-800. 10.1148/radiol.09091086.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lee JM, McMahon PM, Kong CY, Kopans DB, Ryan PD, Ozanne EM, Halpern EF, Gazelle GS: Cost-effectiveness of breast MR imaging and screen-film mammography for screening BRCA1 gene mutation carriers. Radiology. 2010, 254: 793-800. 10.1148/radiol.09091086.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V, Larke FJ: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology. 2003, 229: 261-268. 10.1148/radiol.2291021276.CrossRefPubMed Lewin JM, Isaacs PK, Vance V, Larke FJ: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology. 2003, 229: 261-268. 10.1148/radiol.2291021276.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M, Shumak RS, Danjoux NM, Gunesekara A, Plewes DB: Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2003, 228: 842-850. 10.1148/radiol.2283020961.CrossRefPubMed Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M, Shumak RS, Danjoux NM, Gunesekara A, Plewes DB: Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2003, 228: 842-850. 10.1148/radiol.2283020961.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Jeunehomme F, Muller S, Hamm B, Bick U: Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement. Invest Radiol. 2005, 40: 397-404. 10.1097/01.rli.0000167421.83203.4e.CrossRefPubMed Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Jeunehomme F, Muller S, Hamm B, Bick U: Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement. Invest Radiol. 2005, 40: 397-404. 10.1097/01.rli.0000167421.83203.4e.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Dromain C, Balleyguier C, Muller S, Mathieu MC, Rochard F, Opolon P, Sigal R: Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of breast carcinoma using contrast enhanced digital mammography. Am J Roentgenol. 2006, 187: W528-W537. 10.2214/AJR.05.1944.CrossRef Dromain C, Balleyguier C, Muller S, Mathieu MC, Rochard F, Opolon P, Sigal R: Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of breast carcinoma using contrast enhanced digital mammography. Am J Roentgenol. 2006, 187: W528-W537. 10.2214/AJR.05.1944.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S, Rimareix F, Delaloge S, Tardivon A, Balleyguier C: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol. 2011, 21: 565-574. 10.1007/s00330-010-1944-y.CrossRefPubMed Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S, Rimareix F, Delaloge S, Tardivon A, Balleyguier C: Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol. 2011, 21: 565-574. 10.1007/s00330-010-1944-y.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Skarpathiotakis M, Yaffe MJ, Bloomquist AK, Rico D, Muller S, Rick A, Jeunehomme F: Development of contrast digital mammography. Med Phys. 2002, 29: 2419-2426. 10.1118/1.1510128.CrossRefPubMed Skarpathiotakis M, Yaffe MJ, Bloomquist AK, Rico D, Muller S, Rick A, Jeunehomme F: Development of contrast digital mammography. Med Phys. 2002, 29: 2419-2426. 10.1118/1.1510128.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Puong S, Bouchevreau X, Patoureaux F, Iordache R, Muller S: Dual-energy contrast enhanced digital mammography using a new approach for breast tissue canceling. Proceedings of the Medical Imaging 2007 Conference: Physics of Medical Imaging. Edited by: Hsieh J, Flynn MJ. 2007, SPIE, San Diego, 6510: Puong S, Bouchevreau X, Patoureaux F, Iordache R, Muller S: Dual-energy contrast enhanced digital mammography using a new approach for breast tissue canceling. Proceedings of the Medical Imaging 2007 Conference: Physics of Medical Imaging. Edited by: Hsieh J, Flynn MJ. 2007, SPIE, San Diego, 6510:
18.
go back to reference Birch R, Marshall M: Computation of bremsstrahlung x-ray spectra and comparison with spectra measured with a Ge(Li) detector. Phys Med Biol. 1979, 24: 505-517. 10.1088/0031-9155/24/3/002.CrossRefPubMed Birch R, Marshall M: Computation of bremsstrahlung x-ray spectra and comparison with spectra measured with a Ge(Li) detector. Phys Med Biol. 1979, 24: 505-517. 10.1088/0031-9155/24/3/002.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Wu X, Barnes G, Tucker D: Spectral dependence of glandular tissue dose in screen-film mammography. Radiology. 1991, 179: 144-148.CrossRef Wu X, Barnes G, Tucker D: Spectral dependence of glandular tissue dose in screen-film mammography. Radiology. 1991, 179: 144-148.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Boone JM: Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for arbitrary x-ray spectra in mammography: computer-fit values of Monte Carlo derived data. Medical Physics. 2002, 29: 869-875. 10.1118/1.1472499.CrossRefPubMed Boone JM: Normalized glandular dose (DgN) coefficients for arbitrary x-ray spectra in mammography: computer-fit values of Monte Carlo derived data. Medical Physics. 2002, 29: 869-875. 10.1118/1.1472499.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Metz CE, Pan X: Proper binormal ROC curves: theory and maximum-likelihood estimation. J Math Psychol. 1999, 43: 1-33. 10.1006/jmps.1998.1218.CrossRefPubMed Metz CE, Pan X: Proper binormal ROC curves: theory and maximum-likelihood estimation. J Math Psychol. 1999, 43: 1-33. 10.1006/jmps.1998.1218.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Pesce LL, Metz CE: Reliable and computationally efficient maximum-likelihood estimation of 'proper' binormal ROC Curves1. Acad Radiol. 2007, 14: 814-829. 10.1016/j.acra.2007.03.012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Pesce LL, Metz CE: Reliable and computationally efficient maximum-likelihood estimation of 'proper' binormal ROC Curves1. Acad Radiol. 2007, 14: 814-829. 10.1016/j.acra.2007.03.012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Obuchowski NA, Rockette HE: Hypothesis testing of diagnostic accuracy for multiple readers and multiple tests: an anova approach with dependent observations. Commun. Statist Simula. 1995, 24: 285-308.CrossRef Obuchowski NA, Rockette HE: Hypothesis testing of diagnostic accuracy for multiple readers and multiple tests: an anova approach with dependent observations. Commun. Statist Simula. 1995, 24: 285-308.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE: Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol. 1992, 27: 723-731. 10.1097/00004424-199209000-00015.CrossRefPubMed Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE: Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol. 1992, 27: 723-731. 10.1097/00004424-199209000-00015.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV, Chen YF, Donaghy BA: Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: factorial experimental design. Acad Radiol. 1998, 5: 591-602. 10.1016/S1076-6332(98)80294-8.CrossRefPubMed Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Lenth RV, Chen YF, Donaghy BA: Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating data: factorial experimental design. Acad Radiol. 1998, 5: 591-602. 10.1016/S1076-6332(98)80294-8.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Hillis SL, Berbaum KS: Power estimation for the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method. Acad Radiol. 2004, 11: 1260-1273. 10.1016/j.acra.2004.08.009.CrossRefPubMed Hillis SL, Berbaum KS: Power estimation for the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method. Acad Radiol. 2004, 11: 1260-1273. 10.1016/j.acra.2004.08.009.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Hillis SL, Obuchowski NA, Schartz KM, Berbaum KS: A comparison of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz and Obuchowski-Rockette methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data. Stat Med. 2005, 24: 1579-1607. 10.1002/sim.2024.CrossRefPubMed Hillis SL, Obuchowski NA, Schartz KM, Berbaum KS: A comparison of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz and Obuchowski-Rockette methods for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data. Stat Med. 2005, 24: 1579-1607. 10.1002/sim.2024.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Hillis SL: Monte Carlo validation of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method using normalized pseudovalues and less data-based model simplification. Acad Radiol. 2005, 12: 1534-1541. 10.1016/j.acra.2005.07.012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hillis SL: Monte Carlo validation of the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz method using normalized pseudovalues and less data-based model simplification. Acad Radiol. 2005, 12: 1534-1541. 10.1016/j.acra.2005.07.012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
31.
go back to reference Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Metz CE: Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. Acad Radiol. 2008, 15: 647-661. 10.1016/j.acra.2007.12.015.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Metz CE: Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. Acad Radiol. 2008, 15: 647-661. 10.1016/j.acra.2007.12.015.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
go back to reference Puong S: Multispectral breast imaging with contrast agent injection. Dissertation. 2008, Paris: Paris-Sud University Puong S: Multispectral breast imaging with contrast agent injection. Dissertation. 2008, Paris: Paris-Sud University
Metadata
Title
Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results of a multireader, multicase study
Authors
Clarisse Dromain
Fabienne Thibault
Felix Diekmann
Eva M Fallenberg
Roberta A Jong
Marcia Koomen
R Edward Hendrick
Anne Tardivon
Alicia Toledano
Publication date
01-06-2012
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Breast Cancer Research / Issue 3/2012
Electronic ISSN: 1465-542X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr3210

Other articles of this Issue 3/2012

Breast Cancer Research 3/2012 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine