Assessment of the additional clinical potential of X-ray dark-field imaging for breast cancer in a preclinical setup.
breast cancer
interferometry
mammography
microcalcifications
Journal
Therapeutic advances in medical oncology
ISSN: 1758-8340
Titre abrégé: Ther Adv Med Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101510808
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
06
04
2020
accepted:
20
08
2020
entrez:
30
9
2020
pubmed:
1
10
2020
medline:
1
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Mammography can identify calcifications up to 50-100 μm in size as a surrogate parameter for breast cancer or ductal carcinoma Talbot-Lau X-ray phase-contrast imaging and X-ray dark-field imaging were used to acquire images of breast specimens. The radiation dosage with the technique is comparable with conventional mammography. Three X-ray gratings with periods of 5-10 µm between the X-ray tube and the flat-panel detector provide three different images in a single sequence: the conventional attenuation image, differential phase image, and dark-field image. The images were read by radiologists. Radiological findings were marked and examined pathologically. The results were described in a descriptive manner. A total of 81 breast specimens were investigated with the two methods; 199 significant structures were processed pathologically, consisting of 123 benign and 76 malignant lesions (DCIS or invasive breast cancer). X-ray dark-field imaging identified 15 additional histologically confirmed carcinoma lesions that were visible but not declared suspicious on digital mammography alone. Another four malignant lesions that were not visible on mammography were exclusively detected with X-ray dark-field imaging. Adding X-ray dark-field imaging to digital mammography increases the detection rate for breast cancer and DCIS associated lesions with micrometer-sized calcifications.The use of X-ray dark-field imaging may be able to provide more accurate and detailed radiological classification of suspicious breast lesions.Adding X-ray dark-field imaging to mammography may be able to increase the detection rate and improve preoperative planning in deciding between mastectomy or breast-conserving therapy, particularly in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Mammography can identify calcifications up to 50-100 μm in size as a surrogate parameter for breast cancer or ductal carcinoma
METHODS
METHODS
Talbot-Lau X-ray phase-contrast imaging and X-ray dark-field imaging were used to acquire images of breast specimens. The radiation dosage with the technique is comparable with conventional mammography. Three X-ray gratings with periods of 5-10 µm between the X-ray tube and the flat-panel detector provide three different images in a single sequence: the conventional attenuation image, differential phase image, and dark-field image. The images were read by radiologists. Radiological findings were marked and examined pathologically. The results were described in a descriptive manner.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 81 breast specimens were investigated with the two methods; 199 significant structures were processed pathologically, consisting of 123 benign and 76 malignant lesions (DCIS or invasive breast cancer). X-ray dark-field imaging identified 15 additional histologically confirmed carcinoma lesions that were visible but not declared suspicious on digital mammography alone. Another four malignant lesions that were not visible on mammography were exclusively detected with X-ray dark-field imaging.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Adding X-ray dark-field imaging to digital mammography increases the detection rate for breast cancer and DCIS associated lesions with micrometer-sized calcifications.The use of X-ray dark-field imaging may be able to provide more accurate and detailed radiological classification of suspicious breast lesions.Adding X-ray dark-field imaging to mammography may be able to increase the detection rate and improve preoperative planning in deciding between mastectomy or breast-conserving therapy, particularly in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32994806
doi: 10.1177/1758835920957932
pii: 10.1177_1758835920957932
pmc: PMC7502853
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1758835920957932Informations de copyright
© The Author(s), 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest statement: MR is an employee of Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany. All other authors declare that they do not have any conflicts of interest.
Références
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Feb;192(2):379-83
pubmed: 19155397
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Jul;177(1):165-72
pubmed: 11418420
Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2018 Oct;78(10):927-948
pubmed: 30369626
Radiology. 2011 Jun;259(3):684-94
pubmed: 21436089
Radiology. 2000 Apr;215(1):286-93
pubmed: 10751500
N Engl J Med. 1998 Apr 16;338(16):1089-96
pubmed: 9545356
BMC Cancer. 2011 Nov 14;11:486
pubmed: 22081974
Eur Radiol. 2010 Mar;20(3):734-42
pubmed: 19727744
Z Med Phys. 2013 Sep;23(3):228-35
pubmed: 23380071
Radiology. 2004 Dec;233(3):830-49
pubmed: 15486214
Breast. 2015 Apr;24(2):118-23
pubmed: 25515645
Phys Med Biol. 2005 Jul 7;50(13):2991-3006
pubmed: 15972976
Clin Radiol. 2002 Jul;57(7):563-4
pubmed: 12096852
Eur J Radiol. 2005 Feb;53(2):226-37
pubmed: 15664286
Nat Commun. 2014 May 15;5:3797
pubmed: 24827387
Invest Radiol. 2014 Mar;49(3):131-7
pubmed: 24141742
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 May;194(5):1378-83
pubmed: 20410428
Phys Med Biol. 2013 Apr 21;58(8):2713-32
pubmed: 23552903
Sci Rep. 2016 Nov 14;6:36991
pubmed: 27841341
Eur J Radiol. 2008 Dec;68(3 Suppl):S73-7
pubmed: 18996661
Invest Radiol. 2005 Jul;40(7):385-96
pubmed: 15973129
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017 Nov;166(1):307-314
pubmed: 28748346
Onkologie. 2011;34(7):362-7
pubmed: 21734422
Eur J Radiol. 2009 Nov;72(2):258-65
pubmed: 19592186
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2015 Jan-Feb;21(1):22-7
pubmed: 25323837
Z Med Phys. 2013 Sep;23(3):176-85
pubmed: 23453793
Radiology. 2012 Dec;265(3):707-14
pubmed: 23033499
Invest Radiol. 2011 Dec;46(12):801-6
pubmed: 21788904