Normal parenchymal enhancement patterns in women undergoing MR screening of the breast
- First Online:
- 350 Downloads
To characterize the kinetic and morphological presentation of normal breast tissue on DCE-MRI in a large cohort of asymptomatic women, and to relate these characteristics to breast tissue density.
335 consecutive breast MR examinations in 229 asymptomatic women undergoing high-risk screening evaluations based on recommendations from the American Cancer Society including strong family history and genetic predisposition were selected for IRB-approved review (average age 49.2 ± 10.5 years). Breast tissue density was assessed on precontrast T2-weighted images. Parenchymal enhancement pattern (PEP) was qualitatively classified as minimal, homogeneous, heterogeneous or nodular. Quantitative analysis of parenchymal enhancement kinetics (PEK) was performed, including calculation of initial and peak enhancement percentages (E1, Epeak), the time to peak enhancement (Tpeak) and the signal enhancement ratio (SER).
41.8% of examinations were classified as minimal, 13.7% homogeneous, 23.9% heterogeneous and 21.2% nodular PEP. Women with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts exhibited a higher proportion of nodular PEP (44.2% (27/61)) and significantly higher E1, and Epeak (p < 0.003) compared with those with less dense breasts.
Qualitative and quantitative parenchymal enhancement characteristics vary by breast tissue density. In future work, the association between image-derived MR features of the normal breast and breast cancer risk should be explored.
KeywordsBreast Magnetic resonance imaging Kinetics Normal Screening
- 5.Liu F, Peacock S, DeMartini W, Eby P, Lehman CD (2008) Background parenchymal enhancement on BREAST MRI: characterization and impact on diagnostic accuracy(ed)^(eds). Radiological Society of North America, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- 6.Li H, Giger ML, Jansen SA, Lan L, Bhooshan N, Newstead GM (2009) Computerized breast parenchymal analysis on DCE-MRI.(ed)^(eds) SPIE Medical Imaging ConferenceGoogle Scholar
- 10.Delille JP, Slanetz PJ, Yeh ED, Kopans DB, Garrido L (2005) Physiologic changes in breast magnetic resonance imaging during the menstrual cycle: perfusion imaging, signal enhancement, and influence of the T1 relaxation time of breast tissue. Breast J 11(4):236–241. doi:10.1111/j.1075-122X.2005.21499.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Statist 6:65–70Google Scholar
- 31.Khazen M, Warren RM, Boggis CR et al (2008) A pilot study of compositional analysis of the breast and estimation of breast mammographic density using three-dimensional T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 17:2268–2274. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2547 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Hologic (2010) Hologic-Quantra Volumetric Assessment. http://www.hologic.com/en/breast-screening/volumetric-assessment/. Accessed January 31, 2011
- 39.Jansen SA, Paunesku T, Fan X et al (2009) Ductal carcinoma in situ: x-ray fluorescence microscopy and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging reveals gadolinium uptake within neoplastic mammary ducts in a murine model. Radiology 253(2):399–406. doi:10.1148/radiol.2533082026 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar