Pure Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Kinetic and Morphologic MR Characteristics Compared with Mammographic Appearance and Nuclear Grade

Jansen, Sanaz A.; Newstead, Gillian M.; Abé, Hiroyuki; Shimauchi, Akiko; Schmidt, Robert A.; Karczmar, Gregory S.

doi:10.1148/radiol.2453062061

Cited by 148 publications

(149 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

116

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Prior publications have shown that DCIS with an area of AD occurs in about 7%-13% of the cases (40,41). In our study, the case of DCIS showed focal enhancement and DWI was negative, even though focal enhancement is usually the least common finding, being seen in only 1%-12% of cases (42,43). The reported sensitivity of MRI for the detection of DCIS is lower than that for the detection of invasive breast cancers.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

MRI in the differential diagnosis of primary architectural distortion detected by mammography

Lifang¹,

Zhai²,

Liu³

et al. 2016

Diagn Interv Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

MRI in the differential diagnosis of primary architectural distortion detected by mammography

Lifang¹,

Zhai²,

Liu³

et al. 2016

Diagn Interv Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…6,7,25 Although kinetic curve patterns represent the vascularity and stroma of lesions, benign non-mass-like lesions, such as mastopathy, can show either increased vascularity or stromal edema depending on the menstrual cycle or activity, which may thus lead to a false-positive result. 26 Another factor associated with false-negative results is a volume averaging eŠect due to contamination of the background tissue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Compared to using a single diagnostic criterion (DCE-MRI or ADC value), combining the two (DCE-MRI and ADC value) increased both true-and false-positive cases. Four additional true-positive cases (Cases 17,25,26,27) were identiˆed by adding the ADC value to DCE-MRI, and 4 additional true-positive cases (Cases 13, 21, 22, 23) were identiˆed by adding DCE-MRI to the ADC value. On the other hand, one additional false-positive case (Case 10) was found by adding the ADC value to DCE-MRI, and 2 additional false-positive cases (Cases 1, 2) were found by adding DCE-MRI to the ADC value.…”

Section: Magnetic Resonance In Medical Sciencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Performance of ADC for Non-mass-like Breast Lesions on MR Imaging

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed the usefulness and limitations of utilizing apparent diŠusion coe‹cient (ADC) values on diŠusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for the diŠerential diagnosis of benign and malignant non-mass-like breast lesions. We retrospectively reviewed 27 such lesions (16 malignant, 11 benign) detected on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and analyzed the enhancing patterns of dynamic contrast-enhanced DCE-MRI (distribution and internal enhancement), kinetic curve patterns, and ADC values. All images were obtained with a 1.5-tesla MR unit, with patients supine. On DCE-MRI, malignant lesions tended to show either segmental or branching-ductal distribution, and when lesions with these patterns were considered malignant, sensitivity was 68.8z; speciˆcity, 63.6z; positive predictive value (PPV), 73.3z; negative predictive value (NPV), 58.3z; and accuracy, 66.7z. Kinetic curve analysis did not reliably diŠerentiate benign and malignant non-mass-like lesions. There was no signiˆcant diŠerence between the mean ADC value of the malignant lesions, 0.968×10 -3 mm 2 /s at b＝1000 s/mm 2 , and that of benign lesions, 1.207×10 -3 mm 2 /s (P ＝0.109). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed the most eŠective threshold of ADC value for diŠerentiating tumors as 1.1×10 -3 mm 2 /s; values lower than this were observed more often in malignant than benign lesions (P＝0.054). Us of this threshold yielded sensitivity of 68.8z; speciˆcity, 72.7z; PPV, 78.6z; NPV, 61.5z; and accuracy, 70.4z. Combining the ADC value criteria with the analysis of DCE-MRI pattern increased sensitivity to 93.8z, negative predictive value (NPV) to 85.7z, and accuracy to 77.8z but decreased speciˆcity to 54.5z. Use of ADC values does not adequately improve DCE-MRI performance for diŠerential diagnosis of non-mass-like breast lesions, but adding the ADC value criteria to the DCE-MRI pattern analysis improves sensitivity, NPV, and accuracy.

show abstract

“…A idade e o estado hormonal da paciente também devem ser levados em consideração 4 . Na ressonância magnética, o CDIS manifesta-se como um nódulo em apenas 14 a 41% dos casos [5][6][7] . Quando isso acontece, o nódulo aparece irregular, com margens irregulares ou espiculadas e realce heterogêneo.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Manifestações incomuns do carcinoma ductal in situ: relato de caso

Baldelin¹

2015

Rev Bras Mastologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMORelatamos um caso de uma paciente assintomática, cuja mamografia demonstrou nódulo contendo calcificações e ultrassonografia, imagem semelhante a agrupamento de pequenos cistos. Este achado é inespecífico, mas pode ser encontrado em vários transtornos proliferativos benignos ou fibrocísticos e também no carcinoma ductal in situ. Foi também obtida a tomossíntese e a ressonância magnética, que confirmaram os achados. ABSTRACTIt was related a case of an asymptomatic patient, whose mammography presented a nodule with calcification and the ultrasound images showed a group of small cysts. This is a nonspecific finding, but can be found in several benign or fibrocystic proliferative diseases, and even in ductal carcinoma in situ. The findings confirmation was made by digital breast tomosynthesis and magnetic resonance. . Nesse contexto, torna-se essencial conhecermos suas diferentes formas de manifestação na imagem, a fim de tentarmos interromper o curso dessa doença em um estágio ainda precoce. Relato do casoMulher de 63 anos, assintomática, foi realizar mamografia em uma clínica especializada em imagem. A mamografia digital de campo total mostrou um nódulo oval, isodenso, indistinto, contendo calcificações redondas, medindo 2,0 cm, localizado na união dos quadrantes inferiores da mama esquerda (Figura 1).A ultrassonografia foi realizada em seguida, na tentativa de identificar o nódulo para guiar a biópsia. Nesse exame foi evidenciado um aglomerado de ductos discretamente dilatados, com forma oval e margens circunscritas (Figura 2). A elastografia shearwave mostrou padrão não homogêneo (Figura 3).

show abstract

Pure Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Kinetic and Morphologic MR Characteristics Compared with Mammographic Appearance and Nuclear Grade

Abstract: http://radiology.rsnajnls.org/cgi/content/full/245/3/684/DC1.

Cited by 148 publications

References 31 publications

MRI in the differential diagnosis of primary architectural distortion detected by mammography

MRI in the differential diagnosis of primary architectural distortion detected by mammography

Diagnostic Performance of ADC for Non-mass-like Breast Lesions on MR Imaging

Manifestações incomuns do carcinoma ductal in situ: relato de caso

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About