Background High-grade gliomas (HGGs) and brain metastases (BMs) can display similar imaging characteristics on conventional MRI. In HGGs, the peritumoral edema may be infiltrated by the malignant cells, which was not observed in BMs. Purpose To determine whether the apparent diffusion coefficient values could differentiate HGGs from BMs. Material and Methods Fifty-seven patients underwent conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) before treatment. The minimum and mean ADC in the enhancing tumor (ADC, ADC) and the minimum ADC in the peritumoral region (ADC) were measured from ADC maps. To determine whether there was a statistical difference between groups, ADC values were compared. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine the cutoff ADC value for distinguishing between HGGs and BMs. Results The mean ADC values in the intratumoral regions of HGGs were significantly higher than those in BMs. No differences were observed between groups regarding ADC values. The mean ADC values in the peritumoral edema of HGGs were significantly lower than those in BMs. According to ROC curve analysis, a cutoff value of 1.332 × 10mm/s for the ADC generated the best combination of sensitivity (95%) and specificity (84%) for distinguishing between HGGs and BMs. The same value showed a sensitivity of 95.6% and a specificity of 100% for distinguishing between GBMs and BMs. Conclusion ADC values from DWI were found to distinguish between HGGs and solitary BMs. The peritumoral ADC values are better than the intratumoral ADC values in predicting the tumor type.

No abstract

Automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) is an ultrasound technique that tends to be increasingly used as a supplementary technique in the evaluation of patients with dense glandular breasts. Patients with dense breasts have an increased risk of developing breast cancer compared to patients with fatty breasts. Furthermore, for this group of patients, mammography has a low sensitivity in detecting breast cancers, especially if it is not associated with architectural distortion or calcifications. ABUS is a standardized examination with many advantages in both screening and diagnostic settings: it increases the detection rate of breast cancer, improves the workflow, and reduces the examination time. On the other hand, like any imaging technique, ABUS has disadvantages and even some limitations. Many disadvantages can be diminished by additional attention and training. Disadvantages regarding image acquisition are the inability to assess the axilla, the vascularization, and the elasticity of a lesion, while concerning the interpretation, the disadvantages are the artifacts due to poor positioning, lack of contact, motion or lesion related. This article reviews and discusses the indications, the advantages, and disadvantages of the method and also the sources of error in the ABUS examination.

Breast cancer screening programs using mammography proved their value in detecting breast cancer at early stages and, consequently, reducing the mortality from this disease. Due to the technological progress, the screening programs have shifted from screen-film mammography to digital mammography and nowadays digital breast tomosynthesis became the focus of breast imaging research. Using tomosynthesis in screening increases cancer detection rates and decreases recall and false-positive rates, thus improving the effectiveness of breast cancer screening programs, with positive consequences on health care costs and on patient psychology. More long-term follow-up data must be collected for assessing absolute sensitivity and specificity of digital breast tomosynthesis, together with efforts for addressing the limitations of the method.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of radiomic features extracted from standardized hybrid contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) data for the assessment of hormone receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, tumor grade and Ki-67 in patients with primary breast cancer. Methods: This prospective study included 72 patients with biopsy-proven breast cancer who underwent CEUS examinations between October 2020 and September 2021. Results: A radiomic analysis found the WavEnHH_s_4 parameter as an independent predictor associated with the HER2+ status with 76.92% sensitivity, and 64.41% specificity and a prediction model that could differentiate between the HER2 entities with 76.92% sensitivity and 84.75% specificity. The RWavEnLH_s-4 parameter was an independent predictor for estrogen receptor (ER) status with 55.93% sensitivity and 84.62% specificity, while a prediction model (RPerc01, RPerc10 and RWavEnLH_s_4) could differentiate between the progesterone receptor (PR) status with 44.74% sensitivity and 88.24% specificity. No texture parameter showed statistically significant results at the univariate analysis when comparing the Nottingham grade and the Ki-67 status. Conclusion: Our preliminary data indicate a potential that hybrid CEUS radiomic features allow the discrimination between breast cancers of different receptor and HER2 statuses with high specificity. Hybrid CEUS radiomic features might have the potential to provide a noninvasive, easily accessible and contrast-agent-safe method to assess tumor biology before and during treatment.