An A.I. classifier derived from 4D radiomics of dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI data: potential to avoid unnecessary breast biopsies.


Journal

European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Aug 2021
Historique:
received: 23 12 2020
accepted: 12 02 2021
pubmed: 22 3 2021
medline: 14 7 2021
entrez: 21 3 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Due to its high sensitivity, DCE MRI of the breast (bMRI) is increasingly used for both screening and assessment purposes. The high number of detected lesions poses a significant logistic challenge in clinical practice. The aim was to evaluate a temporally and spatially resolved (4D) radiomics approach to distinguish benign from malignant enhancing breast lesions and thereby avoid unnecessary biopsies. This retrospective study included consecutive patients with MRI-suspicious findings (BI-RADS 4/5). Two blinded readers analyzed DCE images using a commercially available software, automatically extracting BI-RADS curve types and pharmacokinetic enhancement features. After principal component analysis (PCA), a neural network-derived A.I. classifier to discriminate benign from malignant lesions was constructed and tested using a random split simple approach. The rate of avoidable biopsies was evaluated at exploratory cutoffs (C Four hundred seventy (295 malignant) lesions in 329 female patients (mean age 55.1 years, range 18-85 years) were examined. Eighty-six DCE features were extracted based on automated volumetric lesion analysis. Five independent component features were extracted using PCA. The A.I. classifier achieved a significant (p < .001) accuracy to distinguish benign from malignant lesion within the test sample (AUC: 83.5%; 95% CI: 76.8-89.0%). Applying identified cutoffs on testing data not included in training dataset showed the potential to lower the number of unnecessary biopsies of benign lesions by 14.5% (C The investigated automated 4D radiomics approach resulted in an accurate A.I. classifier able to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Its application could have avoided unnecessary biopsies. • Principal component analysis of the extracted volumetric and temporally resolved (4D) DCE markers favored pharmacokinetic modeling derived features. • An A.I. classifier based on 86 extracted DCE features achieved a good to excellent diagnostic performance as measured by the area under the ROC curve with 80.6% (training dataset) and 83.5% (testing dataset). • Testing the resulting A.I. classifier showed the potential to lower the number of unnecessary biopsies of benign breast lesions by up to 36.2%, p < .001 at the cost of up to 4.5% (n = 4) false negative low-risk cancers.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33744990
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07787-z
pii: 10.1007/s00330-021-07787-z
pmc: PMC8270804
doi:

Substances chimiques

Contrast Media 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

5866-5876

Subventions

Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA008748
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

© 2021. The Author(s).

Références

Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 46:1296–1316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015 pubmed: 20304629
Clauser P, Mann R, Athanasiou A et al (2018) A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice. Eur Radiol 28:1909–1918. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5121-4
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5121-4 pubmed: 29168005
Bakker MF, de Lange SV, Pijnappel RM et al (2019) Supplemental MRI screening for women with extremely dense breast tissue. N Engl J Med 381:2091–2102. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1903986
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1903986 pubmed: 31774954
Comstock CE, Gatsonis C, Newstead GM et al (2020) Comparison of abbreviated breast MRI vs digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer detection among women with dense breasts undergoing screening. JAMA 323:746–756. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.0572
doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.0572 pubmed: 32096852 pmcid: 7276668
Verburg E, van Gils C, Bakker M, et al (2020) Computer-aided diagnosis in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging screening of women with extremely dense breasts to reduce false-positive diagnoses. Invest Radiol https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32149858/ . Accessed 2 Jun 2020
Demartini WB, Kurland BF, Gutierrez RL, C Craig Blackmore, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2011) Probability of malignancy for lesions detected on breast MRI: a predictive model incorporating BI-RADS imaging features and patient characteristics. Eur Radiol 21:1609–1617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2094-6
Baltzer PAT, Benndorf M, Dietzel M, Gajda M, Runnebaum IB, Kaiser WA (2010) False-positive findings at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: a BI-RADS descriptor study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1658–1663. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3486
Verburg E, van Gils CH, Bakker MF et al (2020) Computer-aided diagnosis in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging screening of women with extremely dense breasts to reduce false-positive diagnoses. Invest Radiol 55:438–444. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000656
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000656 pubmed: 32149858
Spick C, Schernthaner M, Pinker K et al (2016) MR-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy of MRI-only lesions: a single center experience. Eur Radiol 26:3908–3916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4267-9
doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4267-9 pubmed: 26984430 pmcid: 5052307
Baltzer PAT, Dietzel M, Kaiser WA (2013) A simple and robust classification tree for differentiation between benign and malignant lesions in MR-mammography. Eur Radiol 23:2051–2060. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2804-3
doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2804-3 pubmed: 23579418
Baltzer A, Dietzel M, Kaiser CG, Baltzer PA (2016) Combined reading of Contrast enhanced and diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging by using a simple sum score. Eur Radiol 26:884–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3886-x
doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3886-x pubmed: 26115653
Pinker K, Bickel H, Helbich TH et al (2013) Combined contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance and diffusion-weighted imaging reading adapted to the “Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System” for multiparametric 3-T imaging of breast lesions. Eur Radiol 23:1791–1802. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2771-8
doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2771-8 pubmed: 23504036
Parsian S, Giannakopoulos NV, Rahbar H, Rendi MH, Chai X, Partridge SC (2016) Diffusion-weighted imaging reflects variable cellularity and stromal density present in breast fibroadenomas. Clin Imaging 40:1047–1054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.06.002
Woitek R, Spick C, Schernthaner M et al (2017) A simple classification system (the Tree flowchart) for breast MRI can reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies in MRI-only lesions. Eur Radiol 27:3799–3809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-4755-6
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-4755-6 pubmed: 28275900 pmcid: 5544808
Marino MA, Clauser P, Woitek R et al (2016) A simple scoring system for breast MRI interpretation: does it compensate for reader experience? Eur Radiol 26:2529–2537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-4075-7
doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-4075-7 pubmed: 26511631
Wengert GJ, Pipan F, Almohanna J et al (2019) Impact of the Kaiser score on clinical decision-making in BI-RADS 4 mammographic calcifications examined with breast MRI. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06444-w
Pinker K, Shitano F, Sala E et al (2018) Background, current role and potential applications of radiogenomics. J Magn Reson Imaging 47:604–620. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25870
Baltzer PAT, Freiberg C, Beger S et al (2009) Clinical MR-mammography: are computer-assisted methods superior to visual or manual measurements for curve type analysis? A systematic approach. Acad Radiol 16:1070–1076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2009.03.017
doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.03.017 pubmed: 19523854
Williams TC, DeMartini WB, Partridge SC, Peacock S, Lehman CD (2007) Breast MR imaging: computer-aided evaluation program for discriminating benign from malignant lesions. Radiology 244:94–103. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2441060634
Gweon HM, Cho N, Seo M, Chu AJ, Moon WK (2014) Computer-aided evaluation as an adjunct to revised BI-RADS Atlas: improvement in positive predictive value at screening breast MRI. Eur Radiol 24:1800–1807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3166-1
Vag T, Baltzer PA, Dietzel M et al (2011) Kinetic analysis of lesions without mass effect on breast MRI using manual and computer-assisted methods. Eur Radiol 21(5):893–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-2001-6
Baum F, Fischer U, Vosshenrich R, Grabbe E (2002) Classification of hypervascularized lesions in CE MR imaging of the breast. Eur Radiol 12:1087–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-001-1213-1
doi: 10.1007/s00330-001-1213-1 pubmed: 11976850
Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA et al (2006) Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: multicenter study. Radiology 238:42–53. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2381042117
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2381042117 pubmed: 16373758
Partridge SC, Nissan N, Rahbar H, Kitsch AE, Sigmund EE (2017) Diffusion-weighted breast MRI: clinical applications and emerging techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging JMRI 45:337–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25479
Baltzer P, Mann RM, Iima M et al (2020) Diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast-a consensus and mission statement from the EUSOBI International Breast Diffusion-Weighted Imaging working group. Eur Radiol 30:1436–1450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06510-3
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06510-3 pubmed: 31786616
Tofts PS (2010) T1-weighted DCE imaging concepts: modelling, acquisition and analysis. Magnetom Flash 2010(45):31–39
Nagasaka K, Satake H, Ishigaki S, Kawai H, Naganawa S (2019) Histogram analysis of quantitative pharmacokinetic parameters on DCE-MRI: correlations with prognostic factors and molecular subtypes in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Tokyo Jpn 26:113–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-018-0899-8
Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL et al (1999) Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging JMRI 10:223–232
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199909)10:3<223::AID-JMRI2>3.0.CO;2-S
Mongan J, Moy L, Kahn CE (2020) Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM): a guide for authors and reviewers. Radiol Artif Intell 2:e200029. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.2020200029
doi: 10.1148/ryai.2020200029 pubmed: 33937821 pmcid: 8017414
Rageth CJ, O’Flynn EAM, Pinker K et al (2018) Second International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions). Breast Cancer Res Treat. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-05071-1
Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C (2008) Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol 18:1307–1318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-0863-7
doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-0863-7 pubmed: 18389253 pmcid: 2441490
Dietzel M, Baltzer PAT (2018) How to use the Kaiser score as a clinical decision rule for diagnosis in multiparametric breast MRI: a pictorial essay. Insights Imaging 9:325–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-018-0611-8
doi: 10.1007/s13244-018-0611-8 pubmed: 29616496 pmcid: 5990997
Mann RM, Balleyguier C, Baltzer PA et al (2015) Breast MRI: EUSOBI recommendations for women’s information. Eur Radiol 25:3669–3678. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3807-z
doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3807-z pubmed: 26002130 pmcid: 4636525
Kuhl CK, Strobel K, Bieling H, Leutner C, Schild HH, Schrading S (2017) Supplemental breast MR imaging screening of women with average risk of breast cancer. Radiology 283:361–370. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016161444
Spick C, Baltzer PAT (2014) Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at mr imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology:140474. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14140474
Gillies RJ, Kinahan PE, Hricak H (2016) Radiomics: images are more than pictures, they are data. Radiology 278:563–577. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015151169
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015151169 pubmed: 26579733
Kuhl CK, Truhn D (2020) The long route to standardized radiomics: unraveling the knot from the end. Radiology:200059. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200059
Lambin P, Leijenaar RTH, Deist TM et al (2017) Radiomics: the bridge between medical imaging and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 14:749–762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.141
doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.141 pubmed: 28975929
Dietzel M, Baltzer PAT, Dietzel A et al (2011) Artificial neural networks for differential diagnosis of breast lesions in MR-mammography: a systematic approach addressing the influence of network architecture on diagnostic performance using a large clinical database. Eur J Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.03.024
Zwanenburg A, Vallières M, Abdalah MA et al (2020) The image biomarker standardization initiative: standardized quantitative radiomics for high-throughput image-based phenotyping. Radiology:191145. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020191145
Truhn D, Schrading S, Haarburger C, Schneider H, Merhof D, Kuhl C (2018) Radiomic versus convolutional neural networks analysis for classification of contrast-enhancing lesions at multiparametric breast MRI. Radiology 290:290–297. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018181352
Illan IA, Ramirez J, Gorriz JM et al (2018) Automated detection and segmentation of nonmass-enhancing breast tumors with dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Contrast Media Mol Imaging:2018. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5308517
Dietzel M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Ellmann S et al (2020) Automated volumetric radiomic analysis of breast cancer vascularization improves survival prediction in primary breast cancer. Sci Rep:10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-60393-9
D’Orsi Carl J, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA (2013) ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system, 5th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston

Auteurs

Nina Pötsch (N)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringerguertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Matthias Dietzel (M)

Institute of Radiology, Erlangen University Hospital, Maximiliansplatz 2, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Panagiotis Kapetas (P)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringerguertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Paola Clauser (P)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringerguertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Katja Pinker (K)

Department of Radiology, Breast Imaging Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA.

Stephan Ellmann (S)

Institute of Radiology, Erlangen University Hospital, Maximiliansplatz 2, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Michael Uder (M)

Institute of Radiology, Erlangen University Hospital, Maximiliansplatz 2, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Thomas Helbich (T)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringerguertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.

Pascal A T Baltzer (PAT)

Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringerguertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. pascal.baltzer@meduniwien.ac.at.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH