Purpose Characterize system-specific bias across common magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) platforms for quantitative diffusion measurements in multicenter trials. Methods Diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) was performed on an ice-water phantom along the superior-inferior (SI) and right-left (RL) orientations spanning ±150 mm. The same scanning protocol was implemented on 14 MRI systems at seven imaging centers. The bias was estimated as a deviation of measured from known apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) along individual DWI directions. The relative contributions of gradient nonlinearity, shim errors, imaging gradients and eddy currents were assessed independently. The observed bias errors were compared to numerical models. Results The measured systematic ADC errors scaled quadratically with offset from isocenter, and ranged between −55% (SI) and 25% (RL). Nonlinearity bias was dependent on system design and diffusion gradient direction. Consistent with numerical models, minor ADC errors (±5%) due to shim, imaging and eddy currents were mitigated by double echo DWI and image co-registration of individual gradient directions. Conclusion The analysis confirms gradient nonlinearity as a major source of spatial DW bias and variability in off-center ADC measurements across MRI platforms, with minor contributions from shim, imaging gradients and eddy currents. The developed protocol enables empiric description of systematic bias in multicenter quantitative DWI studies.

A quantitative measure of three-dimensional breast density derived from noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was investigated in 35 women at high-risk for breast cancer. A semiautomatic segmentation tool was used to quantify the total volume of the breast and to separate volumes of fibroglandular and adipose tissue in noncontrast MRI data. The MRI density measure was defined as the ratio of breast fibroglandular volume over total volume of the breast. The overall correlation between MRI and mammographic density measures was R2=.67. However the MRI/mammography density correlation was higher in patients with lower breast density (R2=.73) than in patients with higher breast density (R2=.26). Women with mammographic density higher than 25% exhibited very different magnetic resonance density measures spread over a broad range of values. These results suggest that MRI may provide a volumetric measure more representative of breast composition than mammography, particularly in groups of women with dense breasts. Magnetic resonance imaging density could potentially be quantified and used for a better assessment of breast cancer risk in these populations.

The study objective was to develop a segmentation technique to quantify breast tissue and total breast volume from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data to obtain a breast tissue index (BTI) related to breast density. Our goal is to quantify MR breast density to improve breast cancer risk assessment for certain high-risk populations for whom mammography is of limited usefulness due to high breast density. A semi-automatic 3D segmentation technique was implemented based on a fuzzy c-means technique (FCM) to segment fibroglandular tissue from fat in the breast images. After validation on a phantom, our FCM technique was first used to test the breast tissue measures reproducibility in two consecutive MR examinations of the same patients. The technique was then applied to measure the BTI on 10 high-risk patients. Results of BTI obtained with the semi-automated FCM method were compared with BTI results for the same patients using two other techniques, manual delineation and global threshold. BTI measures correlated well with mammographic densities (Pearson coefficients r = 0.78 using MR manual delineation, and r = 0.75 using MR FCM). The breast tissue index could therefore become a common measure for future studies of using noncontrast MRI data.

No abstract