Mirjam Facius

Potential MRI Interpretation Model: Differentiation of Benign from Malignant Breast Masses

OBJECTIVE Our objective was to increase the accuracy of breast MRI using a semiquantitative analysis of typical MRI features and their diagnostic potential. The prevalence of recently reported MRI signs of breast lesions were analyzed and compared with other well-known signs. CONCLUSION New MRI features, especially from T2-weighted images, are promising for more reliable and accurate interpretation of breast lesions. Prospective studies of these findings are required to define cut-off values and test clinical practicality.

Tumour detection rate of a new commercially available computer-aided detection system

The aim of this study was to determine the tumour detection rate and false positive rate of a new mammographic computer-aided detection system (CAD) in order to assess its clinical usefulness. The craniocaudal and oblique images of 150 suspicious mammograms from 150 patients that were histologically proven to be malignant were analysed using the Second Look CAD (CADx Medical Systems, Quebec, Canada). Cases were selected randomly using the clinics internal tumour case sampler. Correct marking of the malignant lesion in at least one view was scored as a true positive. Marks not at the location of the malignant lesion were scored as false positives. In addition, mammograms with histologically proven benign masses (n=50) and microcalcifications (n=50), as well as 100 non-suspicious mammograms, were scanned in order to determine the value of false-positive marks per image. The 150 mammograms included 94 lesions that were suspicious due to masses, 26 due to microcalcifications and 30 showed both signs of malignancy. The overall sensitivity was 90.0% (135 of 150). Sensitivity on subsets of the data was 88.7% (110 of 124) for suspicious masses (MA) and 98.2% (55 of 56) for microcalcifications. Eight of 14 false-negative cases were large lesions. The overall false-positive rate was observed as 0.28 and 0.97 marks per image of microcalcifications and masses, respectively. The lowest false-positive rates for microcalcifications and MA were observed in the cancer subgroup, whereas the highest false-positive rates were scored in the benign but mammographically suspicious subgroups, respectively. The new CAD system shows a high tumour detection rate, with approximately 1.3 false positive marks per image. These results suggest that this system might be clinically useful as a second reader of mammograms. The system performance was particularly useful for detecting microcalcifications.

Additional value of electrical impedance scanning: experience of 240 histologically-proven breast lesions

The aim of this study was to quantify the clinical value of using electrical impedance scanning (EIS) as an adjunct to other diagnostic techniques in order to identify cancerous tissue based upon its inherent altered local dielectric properties. 210 consecutive women with 240 sonographically and/or mammographically suspicious findings were examined using EIS. All lesions were histologically-proven. 86/103 malignant and 91/137 benign lesions were correctly identified using EIS (87.8% sensitivity, 66.4% specificity). NPV and PPV of 84.3% and 65.2% were observed, respectively. Excluding cases as defined by a priori criteria, i.e. lesions located deeper than 35 mm, lesions larger than 35 mm, and retroareolar lesions, a sensitivity of 85.5% was observed, and for invasive cancers, 91.7%. The detection rate for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) was poor (57.1%, n=14). By adding EIS to mammography and ultrasound, the sensitivity rose from 86.4 to 95.1%, whereas the accuracy decreased from 82.3 to 75.7%. EIS appears to be of interest as an adjunct to breast diagnostic techniques, performing with a reasonable sensitivity. Further investigations on histomorphological characteristics and the reasons for false-negative findings are essential to gain further knowledge about the bioelectricity of breast lesions, and prove the value of this new technology.

Electrical impedance scanning as a new imaging modality in breast cancer detection—a short review of clinical value on breast application, limitations and perspectives

Objective. Cancer cells exhibit altered local dielectric properties compared to normal cells, measurable as different electrical conductance and capacitance using electrical impedance scanning (EIS). Therefore, active biocompatible current is applied to the patient for calculation of both parameters taking into account frequency, voltage and current flow. Subjects and methods. 240 women with 280 sonographically and/or mammographically suspicious findings were examined using EIS. All lesions were histologically proven. A lesion was scored as positive, when a focal increased conductance and/or capacitance was measurable using EIS. The lesion was visible as a bright area in a 256 grey-scale computer output. Due to system limitations patients having a pacemaker or pregnant had to be excluded from the study. Results. 91/113 malignant and 108/167 benign lesions were correctly identified using EIS (80.5% sensitivity, 64.7% specificity). NPV and PPV of 83.1% and 60.7% were observed, respectively. Accuracy was 0.73. A wide range of factors can induce false positive results, although by an experienced observer a number of these findings can be detected such as scars, skin alterations, contact artefacts, air bubbles and naevi, hairs and interfering bone. Based upon visibility on ultrasound (194 lesions visible, 86 not visible) significant differences in the detection rate occurred. Histology-dependent detectability rate varied significantly with lowest rate in CIS-cases (50%). Specificity values varied histology-depending, too; probably depending on the rate of proliferation between 75% (inflammatory lesions) and papillomata (50%). Best detectability was observed in malignant lesions with a size between 20 and 30 mm. Further possible applications will be discussed regarding the currently available literature (lymph nodes, salivary glands, mathematical and animal based models). Conclusion. EIS appears to be a promising new additional technology providing a rather high sensitivity for the verification of suspicious breast lesions. Further investigations on histomorphological characteristics of false negative as well as false positive lesions are essential to gain further knowledge about the bioelectricity of breast lesions. Currently high false positive rate and observer-dependence limit clinical usage. r 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Are unnecessary follow-up procedures induced by computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) in mammography? Comparison of mammographic diagnosis with and without use of CAD

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the rate of unnecessary follow-up procedures recommended by radiologists using a CAD-system. MATERIALS AND METHODS 185 patients (740 images) were consecutively selected from three groups (36 histologically proven cancers = group 1; 49 histologically proven benign lesions = group 2 and 100 screening cases (4 years-follow up = group 3). Mammograms were evaluated by a CAD system (Second Look, CADx, Canada). Five blinded radiologists assessed the images without/with CAD outputs. Diagnostic decisions were ranked from surely benign to surely malignant according to BIRADS classification, follow-up procedures were recommended for each observed lesion (a, screening; b, short interval follow-up examination in 6 months; c, pathologic clarification). RESULTS CAD-system detected 32/36 cancers (88.9%) (FP-rate: 1.04 massmarks and 0.27 calcmarks/image). The following values were reached by all observers without/with CAD in the mean: Sensitivity 80.6/80.0%, specificity 83.2/86.4%, PPV 53.1/58.1%, and NPV 94.6/94.7%. Observers described a similar number of additional lesions without/with the use of CAD (325/326). Whereas the number of unnecessary short-time follow up recommendations increased in all case-subgroups with CAD: 40.8/42.9% (group 1), 35.6/38.1% (group 2), 44.7/46.8% (group 3), respectively, the number of recommended biopsies decreased in all subgroups: group 1: 34.7/27.1%; group 2: 47.4/41.5%, group 3: 33.3/22.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION In this rather small population additional usage of CAD led to a lower rate of unnecessary biopsies. The observed decrease of recommended unnecessary biopsies due to the usage of CAD in the screening group suggests a potential financial benefit by using CAD as diagnostic aid.

Effect of breast density on computer aided detection.

Purpose: This study was conducted to assess the clinical impact of breast density and density of the lesion’s background on the performance of a computer-aided detection (CAD) system in the detection of breast masses (MA) and microcalcifications (MC). Materials and Methods: A total of 200 screening mammograms interpreted as BI-RADS 1 and suspicious mammograms of 150 patients having a histologically verified malignancy from 1992 to 2000 were selected by using a sampler of tumor cases. Excluding those cases having more than one lesion or a contralateral malignancy attributable to statistical reasons, 127 cases with 127 malignant findings were analyzed with a CAD system (Second Look 5.0, CADx Systems, Inc., Beavercreek, OH). Of the 127 malignant lesions, 56 presented as MC and 101 presented as MA, including 30 cases with both malignant signs. Overall breast density of the mammogram and density of the lesion’s background were determined by two observers in congruence (density a: entirely fatty, density b: scattered fibroglandular tissue, density c: heterogeneously dense, density d: extremely dense). Results: Within the unsuspicious group, 100/200 cases did not have any CAD MA marks and were therefore truly negative (specificity 50%), and 151/200 cases did not have any CAD MC marks (specificity 75.5%). For these 200 cases, the numbers of marks per image were 0.41 and 0.37 (density a), 0.38 and 0.97 (density b), 0.44 and 0.91 (density c), and 0.58 and 0.68 (density d) for MC and MA marks, respectively (Fisher’s t-test: n.s. for MC, p < 0.05 for MA). Malignant lesions were correctly detected in at least one view by the CAD system for 52/56 (92.8%) MC and 91/101 (90.1%) MA. Detection rate versus breast density was: 4/6 (66.7%) and 18/19 (94.7%) (density a), 32/33 (97.0%) and 49/51 (96.1%) (density b), 14/15 (93.3%) and 23/28 (82.1%) (density c), and 2/2 (100%) and 1/3 (33.3%) (density d) for MC and MA, respectively. Detection rate versus the lesion’s background was: 19/21 (90.5%) and 36/38 (94.7%) (density a), 34/36 (94.4%) and 59/62 (95.2%) (density b), 8/9 (88.9%) and 20/24 (83.3%) (density c), and 9/10 (90%) and 4/8 (50%) (density d) for groups 2 and 3, respectively. Detection rates differed significantly for masses in heterogeneously dense and extremely dense tissue (overall or lesion’s background) versus all other densities (Fisher’s t-test: p < 0.05). A significantly lowered FP rate for masses was found on mammograms of entirely fatty tissue. Conclusion: Overall breast density and density at a lesion’s background do not appear to have a significant effect on CAD sensitivity or specificity for MC. CAD sensitivity for MA may be lowered in cases with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts, and CAD specificity for MA is highest in cases with extremely fatty breasts. The effects of overall breast density and density of a lesion’s background appear to be similar.

The performance of computer-aided detection when analyzing prior mammograms of newly detected breast cancers with special focus on the time interval from initial imaging to detection.

PURPOSE The clinical role of CAD systems to detect breast cancer, which have not been on cancer containing mammograms not detected by the radiologist was proven retrospectively. METHODS All patients from 1992 to 2005 with a histologically verified malignant breast lesion and a mammogram at our department, were analyzed in retrospect focussing on the time of detection of the malignant lesion. All prior mammograms were analyzed by CAD (CADx, USA). The resulting CAD printout was matched with the cancer containing images yielding to the radiological diagnosis of breast cancer. CAD performance, sensitivity as well as the association of CAD and radiological features were analyzed. RESULTS 278 mammograms fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 111 cases showed a retrospectively visible lesion (71 masses, 23 single microcalcification clusters, 16 masses with microcalcifications, in one case two microcalcification clusters). 54/87 masses and 34/41 microcalcifications were detected by CAD. Detection rates varied from 9/20 (ACR 1) to 5/7 (ACR 4) (45% vs. 71%). The detection of microcalcifications was not influenced by breast tissue density. CONCLUSION CAD might be useful in an earlier detection of subtle breast cancer cases, which might remain otherwise undetected.

Animal-Based Model to Investigate the Minimum Tumor Size Detectable with an Electrical Impedance Scanning Technique

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to determine the minimum tumor size detectable with electrical impedance scanning (EIS) in laboratory animals. MATERIALS AND METHODS VX2 tumor cells (1 mm3) were implanted bilaterally into the upper leg musculature of five white New Zealand rabbits. EIS and ultrasound (US) were performed before, during, and immediately after implantation and on every 2nd day thereafter until tumors could be visualized with both modalities. This was followed by an extended follow-up regimen until a tumor size of 1 cm3 was reached. Rabbits were anesthetized subcutaneously. RESULTS Tumors could not be implanted in one rabbit. Neither EIS nor US were performed in one rabbit due to severe skin alterations at the implantation site. No focal increase in conductance was visible before or immediately after tumor injection. The smallest tumor identified with EIS was determined with US to be approximately 8 mm3. The mean tumor size at initial detection was 52 mm3 (determined with EIS). In two cases, the tumor was first seen with US (EIS detection was delayed with a delay of 1 and 2 days, respectively). In all remaining cases, tumors were detected simultaneously with both EIS and US. All tumors were visible with EIS. CONCLUSION The animal-based model is feasible. VX2 tumors are detectable with EIS. Tumors characterized by a focal spot at EIS could be detected starting at a tumor size of 7.5 mm3.

Two-year follow-up of stereotactically guided 9-G breast biopsy: a multicenter evaluation of a self-contained vacuum-assisted device.

PURPOSE To evaluate the performance of a self-contained, battery-driven, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) system for the sampling of clustered breast microcalcifications and masses under stereotactic guidance. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 144 patients (median age: 56 years; range: 21-87 years) in four European breast centers underwent percutaneous 9-gauge (G), stereotactic-guided VABB. The median lesion size was 11 mm (range 2-60 mm). Patients were biopsied in the prone (n=125) or upright position (n=19). All patients were followed up for at least 24 months. RESULTS The stereotactic procedure was successful in 142 (98.6%) of 144 cases, with two cases cancelled due to either severe patient motion (one case) or failure to detect faint calcifications (one case). A median of 12 specimens per procedure was obtained. In 39 cases (27.5%), the suspicious lesion could no longer be detected mammographically after the biopsy procedure. The histological diagnosis was malignancy in 45 (31.7%) cases. One case of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed preoperatively was upgraded to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at operation, giving an overall sensitivity of 97.7% for the vacuum-assisted biopsy procedure. In two cases where DCIS was diagnosed at vacuum-assisted biopsy, the malignant tissue was apparently completely removed and could no longer be found at operation. No serious complications occurred. During the follow-up period, no breast cancers appeared at the location of biopsy. Six patients dropped out during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION The self-contained, vacuum-assisted biopsy device is well suited for stereotactically guided breast biopsies, having demonstrated excellent sensitivity and specificity in the preoperative workup of mammographically detected breast lesions after 2 years of follow-up.