Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI

Purpose To compare the diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and breast MRI in evaluations of breast cancer, with a focus on the impact of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) levels. Methods The present study included women who underwent CEDM and breast MRI to...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) Japan), 2022-07, Vol.29 (4), p.677-687
Hauptverfasser: Yuen, Sachiko, Monzawa, Shuichi, Gose, Ayako, Yanai, Seiji, Yata, Yoshihiro, Matsumoto, Hajime, Ichinose, You, Tashiro, Takashi, Yamagami, Kazuhiko
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 687
container_issue 4
container_start_page 677
container_title Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)
container_volume 29
creator Yuen, Sachiko
Monzawa, Shuichi
Gose, Ayako
Yanai, Seiji
Yata, Yoshihiro
Matsumoto, Hajime
Ichinose, You
Tashiro, Takashi
Yamagami, Kazuhiko
description Purpose To compare the diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and breast MRI in evaluations of breast cancer, with a focus on the impact of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) levels. Methods The present study included women who underwent CEDM and breast MRI to evaluate the disease extent of breast cancer between January 2018 and December 2019. Readers judged BPE levels (minimal-mild or moderate-marked) on CEDM, and were asked to assign findings suggesting malignancy using the following criteria: (1) enhancement other than BPE and (2) BI-RADS 4/5 calcifications without enhancement. On MRI, BI-RADS 3 and BI-RADS 4/5 lesions were evaluated as benign and malignant, respectively. The diagnostic performances of CEDM and MRI were compared separately between women with minimal-mild BPE and those with moderate-marked BPE. Results Sixty-nine patients comprising 43 postmenopausal and 26 premenopausal women were included in the present study. In total, 195 lesions (94 malignant and 101 benign) were identified. The sensitivity and specificity of CEDM for the diagnosis of all lesions were 90.8 and 91.5% with minimal-mild BPE and 79.3 and 76.2% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 90.0% and 71.0% with minimal-mild BPE and 87.5% and 78.1% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The accuracy of CEDM was significantly superior to that of MRI in women with minimal-mild BPE on both CEDM and MRI ( p  = 0.002). Regarding the negative impact of a correct diagnosis on CEDM, the odds ratio of “moderate-marked BPE” was 0.382. Conclusion In patients with minimal-mild BPE, the diagnostic performance of CEDM was superior to that of MRI.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s12282-022-01345-1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2634518372</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2634518372</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-ded70a640a6c2f2386ba6e1d912c119a92f75f09f7902291719ec52ae43da92c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctuFDEQRS0EIiHwAyyQl2waXHY_2aGIx0hBSAjWVo27-hHadmO7g-bb-Dk8mYEVYlGypbrnll2XsecgXoEQzesIUrayEDIXqLIq4AG7hLYVRSmVepjvqhRF3dbtBXsS460QpWpE_ZhdqEpKUQFcsl87u6JJ3A98j-b7GPzmer5iIGemg8WFk5vQGbLkEl_ojpbIveNpIt7PODof53ikjXcpYEzFWd_n9jinbGDRWj8GXKcDnx2nO1w2TLN399w-UKa4OTLhTbbJ7wlzzCN-zmn6h-0Z-PRl95Q9GnCJ9Ox8XrFv7999vf5Y3Hz-sLt-e1MY1UAqeuobgXWZy8hBqrbeY03QdyANQIedHJpqEN3QdHmVHTTQkakkUqn63DTqir08-a7B_9goJm3naGhZ0JHfopZ1Xj60qpFZKk9SE3yMgQa9htliOGgQ-hiaPoWm8yR9H5qGDL04-297S_1f5E9KWaBOgphbbqSgb_0WXP7z_2x_A9XhpuE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2634518372</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI</title><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Yuen, Sachiko ; Monzawa, Shuichi ; Gose, Ayako ; Yanai, Seiji ; Yata, Yoshihiro ; Matsumoto, Hajime ; Ichinose, You ; Tashiro, Takashi ; Yamagami, Kazuhiko</creator><creatorcontrib>Yuen, Sachiko ; Monzawa, Shuichi ; Gose, Ayako ; Yanai, Seiji ; Yata, Yoshihiro ; Matsumoto, Hajime ; Ichinose, You ; Tashiro, Takashi ; Yamagami, Kazuhiko</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To compare the diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and breast MRI in evaluations of breast cancer, with a focus on the impact of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) levels. Methods The present study included women who underwent CEDM and breast MRI to evaluate the disease extent of breast cancer between January 2018 and December 2019. Readers judged BPE levels (minimal-mild or moderate-marked) on CEDM, and were asked to assign findings suggesting malignancy using the following criteria: (1) enhancement other than BPE and (2) BI-RADS 4/5 calcifications without enhancement. On MRI, BI-RADS 3 and BI-RADS 4/5 lesions were evaluated as benign and malignant, respectively. The diagnostic performances of CEDM and MRI were compared separately between women with minimal-mild BPE and those with moderate-marked BPE. Results Sixty-nine patients comprising 43 postmenopausal and 26 premenopausal women were included in the present study. In total, 195 lesions (94 malignant and 101 benign) were identified. The sensitivity and specificity of CEDM for the diagnosis of all lesions were 90.8 and 91.5% with minimal-mild BPE and 79.3 and 76.2% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 90.0% and 71.0% with minimal-mild BPE and 87.5% and 78.1% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The accuracy of CEDM was significantly superior to that of MRI in women with minimal-mild BPE on both CEDM and MRI ( p  = 0.002). Regarding the negative impact of a correct diagnosis on CEDM, the odds ratio of “moderate-marked BPE” was 0.382. Conclusion In patients with minimal-mild BPE, the diagnostic performance of CEDM was superior to that of MRI.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1340-6868</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1880-4233</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12282-022-01345-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35220511</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore</publisher><subject>Cancer Research ; Medicine ; Medicine &amp; Public Health ; Oncology ; Original Article ; Surgery ; Surgical Oncology</subject><ispartof>Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2022-07, Vol.29 (4), p.677-687</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Breast Cancer Society 2022</rights><rights>2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Breast Cancer Society.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-ded70a640a6c2f2386ba6e1d912c119a92f75f09f7902291719ec52ae43da92c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-ded70a640a6c2f2386ba6e1d912c119a92f75f09f7902291719ec52ae43da92c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6853-359X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12282-022-01345-1$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12282-022-01345-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35220511$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yuen, Sachiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monzawa, Shuichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gose, Ayako</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yanai, Seiji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yata, Yoshihiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsumoto, Hajime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ichinose, You</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tashiro, Takashi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamagami, Kazuhiko</creatorcontrib><title>Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI</title><title>Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)</title><addtitle>Breast Cancer</addtitle><addtitle>Breast Cancer</addtitle><description>Purpose To compare the diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and breast MRI in evaluations of breast cancer, with a focus on the impact of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) levels. Methods The present study included women who underwent CEDM and breast MRI to evaluate the disease extent of breast cancer between January 2018 and December 2019. Readers judged BPE levels (minimal-mild or moderate-marked) on CEDM, and were asked to assign findings suggesting malignancy using the following criteria: (1) enhancement other than BPE and (2) BI-RADS 4/5 calcifications without enhancement. On MRI, BI-RADS 3 and BI-RADS 4/5 lesions were evaluated as benign and malignant, respectively. The diagnostic performances of CEDM and MRI were compared separately between women with minimal-mild BPE and those with moderate-marked BPE. Results Sixty-nine patients comprising 43 postmenopausal and 26 premenopausal women were included in the present study. In total, 195 lesions (94 malignant and 101 benign) were identified. The sensitivity and specificity of CEDM for the diagnosis of all lesions were 90.8 and 91.5% with minimal-mild BPE and 79.3 and 76.2% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 90.0% and 71.0% with minimal-mild BPE and 87.5% and 78.1% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The accuracy of CEDM was significantly superior to that of MRI in women with minimal-mild BPE on both CEDM and MRI ( p  = 0.002). Regarding the negative impact of a correct diagnosis on CEDM, the odds ratio of “moderate-marked BPE” was 0.382. Conclusion In patients with minimal-mild BPE, the diagnostic performance of CEDM was superior to that of MRI.</description><subject>Cancer Research</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine &amp; Public Health</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><issn>1340-6868</issn><issn>1880-4233</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kctuFDEQRS0EIiHwAyyQl2waXHY_2aGIx0hBSAjWVo27-hHadmO7g-bb-Dk8mYEVYlGypbrnll2XsecgXoEQzesIUrayEDIXqLIq4AG7hLYVRSmVepjvqhRF3dbtBXsS460QpWpE_ZhdqEpKUQFcsl87u6JJ3A98j-b7GPzmer5iIGemg8WFk5vQGbLkEl_ojpbIveNpIt7PODof53ikjXcpYEzFWd_n9jinbGDRWj8GXKcDnx2nO1w2TLN399w-UKa4OTLhTbbJ7wlzzCN-zmn6h-0Z-PRl95Q9GnCJ9Ox8XrFv7999vf5Y3Hz-sLt-e1MY1UAqeuobgXWZy8hBqrbeY03QdyANQIedHJpqEN3QdHmVHTTQkakkUqn63DTqir08-a7B_9goJm3naGhZ0JHfopZ1Xj60qpFZKk9SE3yMgQa9htliOGgQ-hiaPoWm8yR9H5qGDL04-297S_1f5E9KWaBOgphbbqSgb_0WXP7z_2x_A9XhpuE</recordid><startdate>20220701</startdate><enddate>20220701</enddate><creator>Yuen, Sachiko</creator><creator>Monzawa, Shuichi</creator><creator>Gose, Ayako</creator><creator>Yanai, Seiji</creator><creator>Yata, Yoshihiro</creator><creator>Matsumoto, Hajime</creator><creator>Ichinose, You</creator><creator>Tashiro, Takashi</creator><creator>Yamagami, Kazuhiko</creator><general>Springer Nature Singapore</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6853-359X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220701</creationdate><title>Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI</title><author>Yuen, Sachiko ; Monzawa, Shuichi ; Gose, Ayako ; Yanai, Seiji ; Yata, Yoshihiro ; Matsumoto, Hajime ; Ichinose, You ; Tashiro, Takashi ; Yamagami, Kazuhiko</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c371t-ded70a640a6c2f2386ba6e1d912c119a92f75f09f7902291719ec52ae43da92c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Cancer Research</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine &amp; Public Health</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yuen, Sachiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monzawa, Shuichi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gose, Ayako</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yanai, Seiji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yata, Yoshihiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Matsumoto, Hajime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ichinose, You</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tashiro, Takashi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamagami, Kazuhiko</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yuen, Sachiko</au><au>Monzawa, Shuichi</au><au>Gose, Ayako</au><au>Yanai, Seiji</au><au>Yata, Yoshihiro</au><au>Matsumoto, Hajime</au><au>Ichinose, You</au><au>Tashiro, Takashi</au><au>Yamagami, Kazuhiko</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI</atitle><jtitle>Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)</jtitle><stitle>Breast Cancer</stitle><addtitle>Breast Cancer</addtitle><date>2022-07-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>677</spage><epage>687</epage><pages>677-687</pages><issn>1340-6868</issn><eissn>1880-4233</eissn><abstract>Purpose To compare the diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) and breast MRI in evaluations of breast cancer, with a focus on the impact of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) levels. Methods The present study included women who underwent CEDM and breast MRI to evaluate the disease extent of breast cancer between January 2018 and December 2019. Readers judged BPE levels (minimal-mild or moderate-marked) on CEDM, and were asked to assign findings suggesting malignancy using the following criteria: (1) enhancement other than BPE and (2) BI-RADS 4/5 calcifications without enhancement. On MRI, BI-RADS 3 and BI-RADS 4/5 lesions were evaluated as benign and malignant, respectively. The diagnostic performances of CEDM and MRI were compared separately between women with minimal-mild BPE and those with moderate-marked BPE. Results Sixty-nine patients comprising 43 postmenopausal and 26 premenopausal women were included in the present study. In total, 195 lesions (94 malignant and 101 benign) were identified. The sensitivity and specificity of CEDM for the diagnosis of all lesions were 90.8 and 91.5% with minimal-mild BPE and 79.3 and 76.2% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 90.0% and 71.0% with minimal-mild BPE and 87.5% and 78.1% with moderate-marked BPE, respectively. The accuracy of CEDM was significantly superior to that of MRI in women with minimal-mild BPE on both CEDM and MRI ( p  = 0.002). Regarding the negative impact of a correct diagnosis on CEDM, the odds ratio of “moderate-marked BPE” was 0.382. Conclusion In patients with minimal-mild BPE, the diagnostic performance of CEDM was superior to that of MRI.</abstract><cop>Singapore</cop><pub>Springer Nature Singapore</pub><pmid>35220511</pmid><doi>10.1007/s12282-022-01345-1</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6853-359X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1340-6868
ispartof Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2022-07, Vol.29 (4), p.677-687
issn 1340-6868
1880-4233
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2634518372
source Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
subjects Cancer Research
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Oncology
Original Article
Surgery
Surgical Oncology
title Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T16%3A14%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Impact%20of%20background%20parenchymal%20enhancement%20levels%20on%20the%20diagnosis%20of%20contrast-enhanced%20digital%20mammography%20in%20evaluations%20of%20breast%20cancer:%20comparison%20with%20contrast-enhanced%20breast%20MRI&rft.jtitle=Breast%20cancer%20(Tokyo,%20Japan)&rft.au=Yuen,%20Sachiko&rft.date=2022-07-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=677&rft.epage=687&rft.pages=677-687&rft.issn=1340-6868&rft.eissn=1880-4233&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12282-022-01345-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2634518372%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2634518372&rft_id=info:pmid/35220511&rfr_iscdi=true