Abstract

BackgroundComputer-aided detection (CAD) can detect breast lesions by using an enhancement threshold. Threshold means the percentage of increased signal intensity in post-contrast imaging compared to precontrast imaging. If the pixel value of the enhanced tumor increases above the set threshold, CAD provides the size of the tumor, which is calculated differently depending on the set threshold. Therefore, CAD requires the accurate setting of thresholds. We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of tumor size measurement using MRI and CAD with 3 most commonly used thresholds and to identify which threshold is appropriate on CAD in breast cancer patients.MethodsA total of 130 patients with breast cancers (80 invasive cancers and 50 ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]) who underwent preoperative MRI with CAD and surgical treatment were included. Tumor size was manually measured on first contrast-enhanced MRI and acquired by CAD using 3 different thresholds (30, 50, and 100%) for each tumor. Tumor size measurements using MRI and CAD were compared with pathological sizes using Spearman correlation analysis. For comparison of size discrepancy between imaging and pathology, concordance was defined as estimation of size by imaging within 5 mm of the pathological size. Concordance rates were compared using Chi-square test.ResultsFor both invasive cancers and DCIS, correlation coefficient rho (r) between tumor size on imaging and pathology was highest at CAD with 30% threshold, followed by MRI, CAD with 50% threshold, and CAD with 100% threshold (all p < 0.05). For invasive cancers, the concordance rate of 72.5% at CAD with 30% threshold showed no difference with that of 62.5% at MRI (p = 0.213). For DCIS, the concordance rate of 30.0% at CAD with 30% threshold showed no difference with that of 36.0% at MRI (p = 0.699). Compared to MRI, higher risk of underestimation was noted when using CAD with 50% or 100% threshold for invasive cancers and when using CAD with 100% threshold for DCIS.ConclusionFor CAD analysis, 30% threshold is the most appropriate threshold whose accuracy is comparable to manual measurement on MRI for tumor size measurement. However, clinicians should be aware of the higher risk of underestimation when using CAD with 50% threshold for tumor staging in invasive cancers.

Highlights

  • Preoperative evaluation of tumor size is important for appropriate surgical planning in breast cancer patients, when planning in breast-conserving surgery

  • For Computer-aided detection (CAD) analysis, 30% threshold is the most appropriate threshold whose accuracy is comparable to manual measurement on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for tumor size measurement

  • Clinicians should be aware of the higher risk of underestimation when using CAD with 50% threshold for tumor staging in invasive cancers

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Preoperative evaluation of tumor size is important for appropriate surgical planning in breast cancer patients, when planning in breast-conserving surgery. To overcome the limitations of breast MRI and to provide an easier way of interpreting enhancement characteristics, computer-aided detection (CAD) was developed and has been widely used since 2008 [13]. It provides quantitative tumor information such as tumor size, angio-volume and kinetic curve analysis, and improves interpretation efficiency of radiologists by speeding up image processing and analysis. It improves the specificity of MRI by determination of benign and malignant lesions using kinetic curve assessment. We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of tumor size measurement using MRI and CAD with 3 most commonly used thresholds and to identify which threshold is appropriate on CAD in breast cancer patients

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call