To evaluate the reliability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed with three-dimensional (3D) sequences in mammographically detected breast microcalcifications.
Methods
During an 8-month period, a group of 28 patients with mammographically detected microcalcifications suspicious for malignancy underwent MRI. Their ages ranged from 33 to 65 years. Examinations were performed with a 1.5 Tesla MR unit and a 3D T1 weighted sequence. Images were interpreted on the basis of morphologic parameters and dynamic behavior in the uptake of contrast medium (Gd-DTPA). Histologic findings were considered as the gold reference.
Results
Histologic analysis revealed invasive carcinoma in 7 patients, 3 of which were associated with foci of lobular carcinoma in situ. Intraductal carcinoma was diagnosed in 8 patients, 1 of which was associated with a tubular carcinoma. Benign lesions accounted for 13 patients. All the neoplastic conditions showed enhancement on MR images (sensitivity, 100%), whereas early and intense enhancement was noted in 5 of 13 benign lesions (specificity, 61%). The positive predictive value was 75% and negative predictive value, 100%.
Conclusions
Although an overlap in the enhancement behavior of malignant and some benign lesions is clearly evident, a careful interpretation of MR images is helpful in detecting and mainly ruling out breast cancer combined with mammographically suspicious microcalcifications.
SicklesE.A., FillyR.A., CallenP.W.: Breast cancer detection with sonography and mammography: comparison using state-of-the-art equipment. AJR, 140: 843–845, 1983.
2.
StomperP.C., MargolinF.R.: Ductal carcinoma in situ: the mammographers perspective. AJR, 162: 585–591, 1994.
3.
TabarL., GadA., HolmbergL.H., GrontoftO., LjungquistU., LundstromB., MansonJ.C., EklundG.: Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Lancet, 1: 829–832, 1985.
4.
HallF.M.: Screening mammography: potential problems on the horizon. N Engl J Med, 314: 53–55, 1986.
5.
ShapiroS.: 10 to 14 year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst, 69: 349–355, 1982.
6.
PelikanS., MoskowitzM.: Effects of lead time, length bias, and false-negative assurance on screening for breast cancer. Cancer, 71: 1998–2005, 1993.
7.
TabarL., DeanP.: The present state of screening for breast cancer. Semin Surg Oncol, 5: 94–101, 1989.
8.
TabarL., GadA.: Screening for breast cancer: the Swedish trial. Radiology, 138: 219, 1981.
9.
HensonD., RiesL.: Progress in early breast cancer detection. Cancer, 65: 2155–2158, 1990.
10.
HarrisJ., LippmanM., VeronesiU., WillettW.: Breast cancer. N Engl J Med, 327: 390–398, 1992.
11.
BassettL.W.: Mammographic analysis of calcifications. Radiol Clin North Am, 30: 93–105, 1992.
GillesR., MeunierM., LucidarmeO., ZafraniB., GuinebretièreJ.M., TardivonA.A., Le GalM., VanelD., NeuenschwanderS., ArriagadaR.: Clustered breast microcalcifications: evaluation by dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 20: 9–14, 1996.
14.
OrelS.G., SchnallM.D., Li VolsiV.A., TroupinR.H.: Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic- pathologic correlation. Radiology, 190: 485–493, 1994.
15.
GillesR., GuinebretiereJ.M., TardivonA.: Non palpable breast tumors: diagnosis by using dynamic contrast enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology, 89: 105, 1993.
16.
OrelS.G., MendocaM.H., ReynoldsC., SchnallM.D., SolinL.J., SullivanD.C.: MR imaging of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology, 202: 413–420, 1997.
17.
Heywang-KobrunnerS.: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol, 29: 94–104, 1994.
18.
KaiserW.: False-positive results in dynamic MR mammography. Causes, frequency and methods to avoid MRI. Clin N Am, 2: 539–555, 1994.
19.
BoetesC., BarentszJ.O., MusR.D., van der SluisR.F., van ErningL.J., HendriksJ.H., HollandR., RuysS.H.: MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced turboflash dynamic subtraction technique. Radiology, 189: 301, 1993.
20.
GillesR., GuinebretiereJ.M., ToussaintC., SpielmanM., RietjensM., PetitJ.Y., ContessoG., MasselotJ., VanelD.: Locally advanced breast cancer: contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging of response to preoperative chemotherapy. Radiology, 191: 633–638, 1994.
21.
HeywangS., WolfA., PrussE., HilbertzT., EiermannW., PermanetterW.: MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology, 171: 95–103, 1989.
22.
KaiserW., ZeitlerE.: MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Radiology, 170: 681–686, 1989.
23.
StackJ.P., RedmondO.M., CobbM.B., DervanP.A., EnnisJ.T.: Breast disease. Tissue characterization with Gd-DTPA enhancement profiles. Radiology, 174: 491, 1990.
24.
KuhlC.K., MielcareckP., KlaschikS., LeutnerC., WardelmannE., GiesekeJ., SchildH.H.: Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions?Radiology, 211: 101–110, 1999.
25.
HeywangS.H., HahnD., SchmidtH., KrischkeI., EiermannW., BassermannR., LissnerJ.: MR imaging of the breast using Gd-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 10: 199, 1986.
26.
WesterhofJ.P., FischerU., MoritzJ.D., OestmannJ.W.: MR imaging of mammographically detected clustered microcalcifications: is there any value?Radiology, 207: 675–681, 1998.
27.
TrecateG., CegliaE., StabileF., Tesoro TessJ.D., MarianiG., ZambettiM., MusumeciR.: Tumori della mammella localmente avanzati: ruolo della RMN nella valutazione della risposta alla terapia prechirurgica e del residuo neoplastico prima dell'intervento. Radiol Med, 95: 449–455, 1998.
28.
TrecateG., CegliaE., StabileF., Tesoro TessJ.D., MarianiG., ZambettiM., MusumeciR.: Locally advanced breast tumors: the role of MRI for evaluating the results of preoperative treatment and of residual malignancy. Tumori, 85: 220–228, 1999.
29.
BloodC.H., ZetterB.R.: Tumor interactions with the vasculature: angiogenesis and tumor metastasis. Biochim Biophys Acta, 1032–1089, 1990.
30.
FolkmanJ.: Tumor angiogenesis. Adv Cancer Res, 43: 175–199, 1985.
GimbroneM.A., LeapmanS.B., CotranR.S., FolkmanJ.: Tumor dormancy in vivo by prevention of neovascularization. J Exp Med, 73: 461–473, 1972.
33.
GullinoP.M.: Natural history of breast cancer. Cancer, 39: 2697–2703, 1997.
34.
JensenH.M., ChenJ., De VaultM.R., LewisA.E.: Angiogenesis induced by “normal” human breast tissue: a probable marker for precancer. Science, 218: 293, 1982.
35.
KaiserW.A.: MR promises earlier breast cancer diagnosis. Diagn Imaging Int, 11: 44–50, 1992.
36.
OttinettiA., SapinoA.: Morphometric evaluation of microvessels surrounding hyperplastic and neoplastic mammary lesions. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 11: 241–248, 1988.
37.
SamejimaN., YamazakiK.: A study on the vascular proliferation in tissues around the tumor in breast cancer. Jpn J Surg, 18: 235–242, 1988.
38.
WattA.C., AckermanL.V., WindhamJ.P., ShettyP.C., BurkeM.W., FlynnM.J., GrodinskyC., FineG., WildermanS.J.: Breast lesions: differential diagnosis using digital subtraction angiography. Radiology, 159: 39–42, 1986.
39.
WeidnerN., SempleJ.P., WelchW.R., FolkmanJ.: Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis: correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med, 324: 1–8, 1991.
40.
Tesoro TessJ.D., AmorusoA., RoviniD., BalzariniL., CegliaE., TrecateG., SavioT., MusumeciR.: Microcalcifications in clinically normal breast: the value of high field, surface coil, Gd-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol, 5: 417–422, 1995.
41.
KaiserW.A.: Dynamic magnetic resonance breast imaging using a double breast coil: an important step towards routine examination of the breast. In: Frontiers in European Radiology, 7. BaertA.L., HeuckF.H.W. (Eds), pp 39–68, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1990.
42.
Heywang-KobrunnerS.H., ViehwegP., HeinigA., KuchlerC.: Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur Radiol, 24: 94–108, 1997.
