Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 21, Issue 8, pp 1609–1617 | Cite as

Probability of malignancy for lesions detected on breast MRI: a predictive model incorporating BI-RADS imaging features and patient characteristics

  • Wendy B. DeMartiniEmail author
  • Brenda F. Kurland
  • Robert L. Gutierrez
  • C. Craig Blackmore
  • Sue Peacock
  • Constance D. Lehman
Breast

Abstract

Objectives

To predict the probability of malignancy for MRI-detected breast lesions with a multivariate model incorporating patient and lesion characteristics.

Methods

Retrospective review of 2565 breast MR examinations from 1/03–11/06. BI-RADS 3, 4 and 5 lesions initially detected on MRI for new cancer or high-risk screening were included and outcomes determined by imaging, biopsy or tumor registry linkage. Variables were indication for MRI, age, lesion size, BI-RADS lesion type and kinetics. Associations with malignancy were assessed using generalized estimating equations and lesion probabilities of malignancy were calculated.

Results

855 lesions (155 malignant, 700 benign) were included. Strongest associations with malignancy were for kinetics (washout versus persistent; OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.5–7.1) and clinical indication (new cancer versus high-risk screening; OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.7–5.1). Also significant were age > = 50 years, size > = 10 mm and lesion-type mass. The most predictive model (AUC 0.70) incorporated indication, size and kinetics. The highest probability of malignancy (41.1%) was for lesions on MRI for new cancer, > = 10 mm with washout. The lowest (1.2%) was for lesions on high-risk screening, <10 mm with persistent kinetics.

Conclusions

A multivariate model shows promise as a decision support tool in predicting malignancy for MRI-detected breast lesions.

Keywords

Breast MRI Kinetics Multivariate analysis Biopsy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the GE-Radiology Research Academic Fellowship (GERRAF) Program Sponsored by the Association of University Radiologists (AUR).

Support was also provided by a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Center Support Grant for biostatistics as a shared resource (P30 CA015704). This paper was presented at the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) 2008 Annual Meeting.

References

  1. 1.
    Harms SE, Flamig DP (1993) MR imaging of the breast: technical approach and clinical experience. Radiographics 13:905–912PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Orel SG, Schnall MD, Powell CM et al (1995) Staging of suspected breast cancer: effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 196:115–122PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mumtaz H, Hall-Craggs MA, Davidson T et al (1997) Staging of symptomatic primary breast cancer with MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:417–424PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fischer U, Kopka L, Grabbe E (1999) Breast carcinoma: effect of preoperative contrast-enhanced MR imaging on the therapeutic approach. Radiology 213:881–888PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bedrosian I, Mick R, Orel SG et al (2003) Changes in the surgical management of patients with breast carcinoma based on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 98:468–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK (2003) MR imaging of the ipsilateral breast in women with percutaneously proven breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:901–910PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schelfout K, Van Goethem M, Kersschot E et al (2004) Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast lesions and effect on treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol 30:501–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA et al (2005) MRI detection of distinct incidental cancer in women with primary breast cancer studied in IBMC 6883. J Surg Oncol 92:32–38PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tan JE, Orel SG, Schnall MD, Schultz DJ, Solin LJ (1999) Role of magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance imaging-guided surgery in the evaluation of patients with early-stage breast cancer for breast conservation treatment. Am J Clin Oncol 22:414–418PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tillman GF, Orel SG, Schnall MD, Schultz DJ, Tan JE, Solin LJ (2002) Effect of breast magnetic resonance imaging on the clinical management of women with early-stage breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 20:3413–3423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS et al (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233:830–849PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim do Y, Moon WK, Cho N et al (2007) MRI of the breast for the detection and assessment of the size of ductal carcinoma in situ. Korean J Radiol 8:32–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hollingsworth AB, Stough RG, O’Dell CA, Brekke CE (2008) Breast magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative locoregional staging. Am J Surg 196:389–397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sardanelli F, Giuseppetti GM, Panizza P et al (2004) Sensitivity of MRI versus mammography for detecting foci of multifocal, multicentric breast cancer in Fatty and dense breasts using the whole-breast pathologic examination as a gold standard. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1149–1157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hlawatsch A, Teifke A, Schmidt M, Thelen M (2002) Preoperative assessment of breast cancer: sonography versus MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1493–1501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bagley FH (2004) The role of magnetic resonance imaging mammography in the surgical management of the index breast cancer. Arch Surg 139:380–383, discussion 383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Houssami NCS, Macaskill P, Lord SJ, Warren RM, Dixon JM, Irwig L (2008) Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:3248–3258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rieber A, Merkle E, Bohm W, Brambs HJ, Tomczak R (1997) MRI of histologically confirmed mammary carcinoma: clinical relevance of diagnostic procedures for detection of multifocal or contralateral secondary carcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 21:773–779PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Yeh ED, Talele AC, Kopans DB (2002) Occult contralateral breast carcinoma incidentally detected by breast magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 8:145–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liberman L, Morris EA, Kim CM et al (2003) MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:333–341PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee SG, Orel SG, Woo IJ et al (2003) MR imaging screening of the contralateral breast in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer: preliminary results. Radiology 226:773–778PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Viehweg P, Rotter K, Laniado M et al (2004) MR imaging of the contralateral breast in patients after breast-conserving therapy. Eur Radiol 14:402–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pediconi F, Catalano C, Roselli A et al (2007) Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions. Radiology 243:670–680PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lehman CD, Blume JD, Thickman D et al (2005) Added cancer yield of MRI in screening the contralateral breast of women recently diagnosed with breast cancer: results from the International Breast Magnetic Resonance Consortium (IBMC) trial. J Surg Oncol 92:9–15, discussion 15–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Kuhl CK et al (2007) MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356:1295–1303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Bartels CC, Obdeijn AI, Oudkerk M (2000) Earlier detection of breast cancer by surveillance of women at familial risk. Eur J Cancer 36:514–519PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Podo F, Sardanelli F, Canese R et al (2002) The Italian multi-centre project on evaluation of MRI and other imaging modalities in early detection of breast cancer in subjects at high genetic risk. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 21(3 Suppl):115–124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ et al (2003) MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:619–626PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C et al (2004) Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 351:427–437PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA et al (2004) Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 292:1317–1325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC et al (2005) Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:8469–8476PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P et al (2005) Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 103:1898–1905PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK et al (2005) Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet 365:1769–1778PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G et al (2007) Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 242:698–715PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stomper PC, Waddell BE, Edge SB, Klippenstein DL (1999) Breast MRI in the evaluation of patients with occult primary breast carcinoma. Breast J 5:230–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Henry-Tillman RS, Harms SE, Westbrook KC, Korourian S, Klimberg VS (1999) Role of breast magnetic resonance imaging in determining breast as a source of unknown metastatic lymphadenopathy. Am J Surg 178:496–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Orel SG, Weinstein SP, Schnall MD et al (1999) Breast MR imaging in patients with axillary node metastases and unknown primary malignancy. Radiology 212:543–549PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Obdeijn IM, Brouwers-Kuyper EM, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Wiggers T, Oudkerk M (2000) MR imaging-guided sonography followed by fine-needle aspiration cytology in occult carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:1079–1084PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Olson JA Jr, Morris EA, Van Zee KJ, Linehan DC, Borgen PI (2000) Magnetic resonance imaging facilitates breast conservation for occult breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 7:411–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Buchanan CL, Morris EA, Dorn PL, Borgen PI, Van Zee KJ (2005) Utility of breast magnetic resonance imaging in patients with occult primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 12:1045–1053PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    ACR (2003) ACR BI-RADS®—MRI. ACR breast imaging reporting and data system, breast imaging atlas. American College of Radiology, RestonGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kaiser WA, Zeitler E (1989) MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 170(3 Pt 1):681–686PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL et al (1993) MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 187:493–501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD et al (1994) MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced TurboFLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 193:777–781PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Viehweg P, Heinig A, Kuchler C (1997) Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur J Radiol 24:94–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Orel SG, Schnall MD (2001) MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 220:13–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gilles R, Guinebretiere JM, Lucidarme O et al (1994) Nonpalpable breast tumors: diagnosis with contrast-enhanced subtraction dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 191:625–631PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Heywang SH, Wolf A, Pruss E, Hilbertz T, Eiermann W, Permanetter W (1989) MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology 171:95–103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Perman WH, Heiberg EM, Grunz J, Herrmann VM, Janney CG (1994) A fast 3D-imaging technique for performing dynamic Gd-enhanced MRI of breast lesions. Magn Reson Imaging 12:545–551PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kelcz F, Santyr GE, Cron GO, Mongin SJ (1996) Application of a quantitative model to differentiate benign from malignant breast lesions detected by dynamic, gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 6:743–752PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S et al (1999) Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 211:101–110PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hulka CA, Smith BL, Sgroi DC et al (1995) Benign and malignant breast lesions: differentiation with echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 197:33–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ et al (2002) Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:171–178PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wang LC, DeMartini WB, Partridge SC, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) MRI-detected suspicious breast lesions: predictive values of kinetic features measured by computer-aided evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:826–831PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bassett LW, Dhaliwal SG, Eradat J, Khan O, Farria DF, Brenner RJ, Sayre JW (2008) National trends and practices in breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:332–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Levine D, Bankier AA, Halpern EF (2009) Submissions to radiology: our top 10 list of statistical errors. Radiology 253:288–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Liang KY, Zeger SL (1986) Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika 73:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1983) A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148:839–843PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hammill BGPJ (2006) A SAS/IML software program for GEE and regression diagnostics. Comput Stat Data Anal 51:1197–1212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gonen M (2008) Analyzing receiver operating characteristic curves with SAS. SAS, CaryGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Fischer U, Kopka L, Brinck U, Korabiowska M, Schauer A, Grabbe E (1997) Prognostic value of contrast-enhanced MR mammography in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 7:1002–1005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Gutierrez RL, Demartini WB, Eby P, Kurland BF, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) Clinical indication and patient age predict likelihood of malignancy in suspicious breast MRI lesions. Acad Radiol 16:1281–1285. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.04.012 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Gutierrez RL, DeMartini WB, Eby PR, Kurland BF, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2009) BI-RADS lesion characteristics predict likelihood of malignancy in breast MRI for masses but not for nonmasslike enhancement. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:994–1000. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.1983 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA et al (2006) Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 238:42–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Han BK, Schnall MD, Orel SG, Rosen M (2008) Outcome of MRI-guided breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:1798–1804. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.2827 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Liberman L, Mason G, Morris EA, Dershaw DD (2006) Does size matter? Positive predictive value of MRI-detected breast lesions as a function of lesion size. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:426–430PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wendy B. DeMartini
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Brenda F. Kurland
    • 3
    • 5
  • Robert L. Gutierrez
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. Craig Blackmore
    • 4
  • Sue Peacock
    • 1
    • 2
  • Constance D. Lehman
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity of Washington Medical CenterSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Breast imagingSeattle Cancer Care AllianceSeattleUSA
  3. 3.Clinical StaticsFred Hutchinson Cancer Research CenterSeattleUSA
  4. 4.Department of RadiologyVirginia Mason Medical CenterSeattleUSA
  5. 5.Seattle Cancer Care AllianceSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations