Predicting Malignancy of Breast Imaging Findings Using Quantitative Analysis of Contrast-Enhanced Mammography (CEM)

被引:2
作者
Miller, Matthew M. [1 ]
Rubaiyat, Abu Hasnat Mohammad [2 ]
Rohde, Gustavo K. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Virginia Hlth Syst, Dept Radiol & Med Imaging, 1215 Lee St, Charlottesville, VA 22903 USA
[2] Univ Virginia, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, 415 Lane Rd, Charlottesville, VA 22903 USA
[3] Univ Virginia, Dept Biomed Engn, 415 Lane Rd, Charlottesville, VA 22903 USA
关键词
mammography; radiographic image enhancement; contrast media; computer-assisted image processing; SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; RADIOGENOMIC ANALYSIS; MOLECULAR SUBTYPES; CANCER MORTALITY; MRI; PERFORMANCE; FEATURES; IMPACT;
D O I
10.3390/diagnostics13061129
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
We sought to develop new quantitative approaches to characterize the spatial distribution of mammographic density and contrast enhancement of suspicious contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) findings to improve malignant vs. benign classifications of breast lesions. We retrospectively analyzed all breast lesions that underwent CEM imaging and tissue sampling at our institution from 2014-2020 in this IRB-approved study. A penalized linear discriminant analysis was used to classify lesions based on the averaged histograms of radial distributions of mammographic density and contrast enhancement. T-tests were used to compare the classification accuracies of density, contrast, and concatenated density and contrast histograms. Logistic regression and AUC-ROC analyses were used to assess if adding demographic and clinical data improved the model accuracy. A total of 159 suspicious findings were evaluated. Density histograms were more accurate in classifying lesions as malignant or benign than a random classifier (62.37% vs. 48%; p < 0.001), but the concatenated density and contrast histograms demonstrated a higher accuracy (71.25%; p < 0.001) than the density histograms alone. Including the demographic and clinical data in our models led to a higher AUC-ROC than concatenated density and contrast images (0.81 vs. 0.70; p < 0.001). In the classification of invasive vs. non-invasive malignancy, the concatenated density and contrast histograms demonstrated no significant improvement in accuracy over the density histograms alone (77.63% vs. 78.59%; p = 0.504). Our findings suggest that quantitative differences in the radial distribution of mammographic density could be used to discriminate malignant from benign breast findings; however, classification accuracy was significantly improved with the addition of contrast-enhanced imaging data from CEM. Adding patient demographic and clinical information further improved the classification accuracy.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer
    Berry, DA
    Cronin, KA
    Plevritis, SK
    Fryback, DG
    Clarke, L
    Zelen, M
    Mandelblatt, JS
    Yakovlev, AY
    Habbema, JDF
    Feuer, EJ
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2005, 353 (17) : 1784 - 1792
  • [2] Computerized three-class classification of MRI-based prognostic markers for breast cancer
    Bhooshan, Neha
    Giger, Maryellen
    Edwards, Darrin
    Yuan, Yading
    Jansen, Sanaz
    Li, Hui
    Lan, Li
    Sattar, Husain
    Newstead, Gillian
    [J]. PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2011, 56 (18) : 5995 - 6008
  • [3] Cancerous Breast Lesions on Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Images: Computerized Characterization for Image-based Prognostic Markers
    Bhooshan, Neha
    Giger, Maryellen L.
    Jansen, Sanaz A.
    Li, Hui
    Lan, Li
    Newstead, Gillian M.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2010, 254 (03) : 680 - 690
  • [4] MRI Phenotype of Breast Cancer: Kinetic Assessment for Molecular Subtypes
    Blaschke, Eric
    Abe, Hiroyuki
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2015, 42 (04) : 920 - 924
  • [5] The impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in Europe: a review of observational studies
    Broeders, Mireille
    Moss, Sue
    Nystrom, Lennarth
    Njor, Sisse
    Jonsson, Hakan
    Poop, Ellen
    Massat, Nathalie
    Duffy, Stephen
    Lynge, Elsebeth
    Paci, Eugenio
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2012, 19 : 14 - 25
  • [6] Diagnostic performance of dual-energy contrast-enhanced subtracted mammography in dense breasts compared to mammography alone: interobserver blind-reading analysis
    Cheung, Yun-Chung
    Lin, Yu-Ching
    Wan, Yung-Liang
    Yeow, Kee-Min
    Huang, Pei-Chin
    Lo, Yung-Feng
    Tsai, Hsiu-Pei
    Ueng, Shir-Hwa
    Chang, Chee-Jen
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2014, 24 (10) : 2394 - 2403
  • [7] Contrast-enhanced Mammography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance
    Cozzi, Andrea
    Magni, Veronica
    Zanardo, Moreno
    Schiaffino, Simone
    Sardanelli, Francesco
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2022, 302 (03) : 568 - 581
  • [8] Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation
    Fallenberg, Eva M.
    Schmitzberger, Florian F.
    Amer, Heba
    Ingold-Heppner, Barbara
    Balleyguier, Corinne
    Diekmann, Felix
    Engelken, Florian
    Mann, Ritse M.
    Renz, Diane M.
    Bick, Ulrich
    Hamm, Bernd
    Dromain, Clarisse
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2017, 27 (07) : 2752 - 2764
  • [9] Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: Does mammography provide additional clinical benefits or can some radiation exposure be avoided?
    Fallenberg, Eva Maria
    Dromain, Clarisse
    Diekmann, Felix
    Renz, Diane M.
    Amer, Heba
    Ingold-Heppner, Barbara
    Neumann, Avidan U.
    Winzer, Klaus J.
    Bick, Ulrich
    Hamm, Bernd
    Engelken, Florian
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2014, 146 (02) : 371 - 381
  • [10] Fully Automated Support System for Diagnosis of Breast Cancer in Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography Images
    Fanizzi, Annarita
    Losurdo, Liliana
    Basile, Teresa Maria A.
    Bellotti, Roberto
    Bottigli, Ubaldo
    Delogu, Pasquale
    Diacono, Domenico
    Didonna, Vittorio
    Fausto, Alfonso
    Lombardi, Angela
    Lorusso, Vito
    Massafra, Raffaella
    Tangaro, Sabina
    La Forgia, Daniele
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2019, 8 (06)