4.7 Article

Diagnostic Performance of Diffusion Tensor Imaging Parameters in Breast Cancer and Correlation With the Prognostic Factors

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Volume 45, Issue 3, Pages 660-672

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25481

Keywords

breast; magnetic resonance imaging; diffusion tensor imaging; apparent diffusion coefficient; diffusion-weighted imaging; fractional anisotropy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic performances of the diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parameters in the diagnosis of breast cancer and to investigate the variations in DTI parameters according to the breast cancer biomarkers. Materials: and MethodsAt 3.0 Tesla (T), DTI was performed in 85 patients with 92 enhancing breast lesions. (1), (2), (3), mean diffusivity (MD), radial diffusivity (RD), fractional anisotropy (FA), relative anisotropy (RA), and geodesic anisotropy (GA) were studied and compared with diffusion-weighted imaging-derived apparent diffusion coefficient. Lesions were analyzed according to BIRADS lexicon. Logistic regression models were constructed to determine the contribution of DTI to the specificity and the accuracy of DCE-MRI. Breast cancer biomarkers; estrogen receptor (ER), HER-2 status, and Ki-67 were correlated with DTI in malignant cases. Results: Malignant lesions exhibited significantly lower MD, RD, (1), (2), (3) and higher FA, RA, GA values (P< 0.001). Logistic regression models showed that MD, RD, (1), (2), (3), FA, and RA increase the specificity of the DCE-MRI (from 83.0% to 89.4-93.6%; P< 0.05). Higher RD, (2), (3) and lower FA, RA, and GA values were observed in ER-negative breast cancer (P< 0.05). Ki-67 showed significant, negative correlation with FA, RA, GA, (1)-(3) and (1)-(2) (r=-0.336 to -0.435; P< 0.05). Conclusion: Besides its ability to differentiate malignant breast lesions, DTI improves the specificity of conventional 3.0T breast MRI and shows correlation with biomarkers ER and Ki-67.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available