Abstract
Background
The high concentration of gadolinium in gadobutrol, which is widely used in Japan, helps visualize signal enhancement of neoplastic lesions, however, there was concern that high T1 relaxivity could decrease the contrast between the lesion and the background mammary gland. We evaluate the effect of gadobutrol on background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) and differential diagnosis between benign and malignant lesions in dynamic MRI of the breast.
Methods
Ninety-nine patients were enrolled prospectively. Measurements of the following signal intensities (SIs) were obtained: breast tissue on a pre-contrast image (SIpre) and an early-phase image (SIearly); and the SIs of breast cancer on a pre-contrast image (SIpre-cancer) and an early-phase image (SIearly-cancer). We calculated the BPE ratio, i.e., (SIearly − SIpre)/SIpre and the cancer/BPE ratio, i.e., (SIearly-cancer − SIpre-cancer)/(SIearly on the affected side − SIpre on the affected side). These quantitative assessments were compared with the data from the recently published multicenter study (reference study without use of gadobutrol). In addition, two radiologists reinterpreted each of the MR images, and a third radiologist set the ROIs in the lesions and performed kinetic analysis as a Reader 3.
Results
While there was no significant difference in the SI of breast cancer in the premenopausal patients between the two studies, that in postmenopausal patients was significantly higher in the present study than in the reference study (p = 0.002). Although there was no significant difference in the cancer/BPE ratio in the postmenopausal patients between the two studies, the cancer/BPE ratio in the premenopausal patients was significantly higher in the reference study than in the present study (p = 0.028). For differentiation between benign and malignant masses, the mass margin was found to be the most important term (p < 0.001). According to the data of Reader 3, visual washout was observed in all 18 patients in whom the interpretation was changed from “plateau” to “washout”.
Conclusions
Gadobutrol may decrease the contrast between breast cancer and background parenchyma in premenopausal patients, and it may have a characteristic that “washout” does not easily occur, leading to “plateau” in patients with breast cancer.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Huppertz A, Rohrer M. Gadobutrol, a highly concentrated MR-imaging contrast agent: its physicochemical characteristics and the basis for its use in contrast-enhanced MR angiography and perfusion imaging. Eur Radiol. 2004;14(Suppl 5):M12–8.
Rohrer M, Bauer H, Mintorovitch J, Requardt M, Weinmann HJ. Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:715–24.
Shen Y, Goerner FL, Snyder C, Morelli JN, Hao D, Hu D, et al. T1 relaxivities of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance contrast agents in human whole blood at 1.5, 3, and 7 T. Invest Radiol. 2015;50:330–8.
Kuwatsuru R, Takahashi S, Umeoka S, Sugihara R, Zeng M, Huan Y, et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled, single-blind comparison phase III study to determine the efficacy and safety of gadobutrol 1.0 M versus gadopentetate dimeglumine following single injection in patients referred for contrast-enhanced MRI of the body regions or extremities. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;41:404–13.
Renz DM, Durmus T, Böttcher J, Taupitz M, Diekmann F, Huppertz A, et al. Comparison of gadoteric acid and gadobutrol for detection as well as morphologic and dynamic characterization of lesions on breast dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2014;49:474–84.
Fallenberg EM, Renz DM, Karle B, Schwenke C, Ingod-Heppner B, Reles A, et al. Intraindividual, randomized comparison of the macrocyclic contrast agents gadobutrol and gadoterate meglumine in breast magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:837–49.
Kuhl CK, Bieling HB, Gieseke J, Kreft BP, Sommer T, Lutterbey G, et al. Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical-phase dependency. Radiology. 1997;203:137–44.
Müller-Schimpfle M, Ohmenhaüser K, Stoll P, Dietz K, Claussen CD. Menstrual cycle and age: influence on parenchymal contrast medium enhancement in MR imaging of the breast. Radiology. 1997;203:145–9.
ACR BI-RADS®Atlas Breast imaging reporting and data system, 5thed, American College of Radiology, Reston, 2013.
Kamitani T, Yabuuchi H, Kanemaki Y, Tozaki M, Sonomura T, Mizukoshi W, et al. Effects of menstrual cycle on background parenchymal enhancement and detectability of breast cancer on dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI: a multicenter study of an Asian population. Eur J Radiol. 2019;110:130–5.
Grimm LJ, Anderson AL, Baker JA, Johnson KS, Walsh R, Yoon SC, et al. Interobserver variability between breast imagers using the fifth edition of the BI-RADS MRI Lexicon. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:1120–4.
Tozaki M, Fukuda K, Suzuki M. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of invasive ductal carcinoma: influence of histological scirrhous component on MR descriptors. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2006;5:137–46.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a Grant from Bayer Yakuhin Ltd. (Osaka, Japan). Part of the statistical analyses was conducted by Kondo Photo Process Co. Ltd. (Osaka, Japan).
Funding
This study was supported by Bayer Yakuhin Ltd. (Osaka, Japan), which had no role regarding the study performance.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Tozaki, M., Yabuuchi, H., Goto, M. et al. Effects of gadobutrol on background parenchymal enhancement and differential diagnosis between benign and malignant lesions in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Breast Cancer 28, 927–936 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-021-01229-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-021-01229-w