Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI in Patients with Suspicious Microcalcifications on Mammography: Results of a Multicenter Trial

University of Rome Tor Vergata, Roma, Latium, Italy
American Journal of Roentgenology (Impact Factor: 2.73). 06/2006; 186(6):1723-32. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.04.1898
Source: PubMed


The objective of our study was to test dynamic MRI in evaluating mammographically detected suspicious microcalcifications.
One hundred twelve patients with mammographically detected microcalcifications with BI-RADS category 5 (n = 78) or 4 (n = 34) lesions were studied at 17 centers a using 3D gradient-echo dynamic coronal technique (< or = 3 mm thickness) and 0.1 mmol/kg of gadoteridol. A pathologic sample was obtained in all cases. Agreement between the major diameter measured on mammography, MRI, or both and the major diameter measured at pathologic examination was calculated in 62 cases.
Of the 112 lesions, pathologic examination revealed 37 benign lesions, 33 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and 42 invasive carcinomas. The specificity of MRI for benign lesions was 68%. Considering the subgroups of calcifications alone and calcifications associated with masses, the specificity values became 79% and 33%, respectively. The sensitivity of MRI for DCIS was 79%. Analysis of the two subgroups showed sensitivity values of 68% for calcifications alone and of 1% for calcifications associated with masses. The sensitivity for invasive carcinomas was 93%. Analysis of the two subgroups showed sensitivity values to be 92% for calcifications alone and 94% for calcifications associated with masses. Considering the overall results, the sensitivity of MRI was 87%; specificity, 68%; positive predictive value, 84%; negative predictive value, 71%; and accuracy, 80%. Considering the subgroups of calcifications alone and calcifications associated with masses, the sensitivity values became 80% and 97%; the positive predictive values, 86% and 82%; the negative predictive values, 71% and 75% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19-0.99); and the accuracy values, 80% and 82% (95% CI, 0.66-0.92), respectively. An odds ratio (OR) of 13.54 (95% CI, 5.20-35.28) showed a raised risk of malignant breast tumor in subjects with positive MR examination of mammographically detected suspicious clusters of microcalcifications. The statistical analysis on each subgroup showed an OR of 15.07 (95% CI, 4.73-48.08) for calcifications alone and an OR of 14.00 (95% CI, 1.23-158.84) for calcifications associated with masses. Any significant improvement in the predictive ability of dynamic MRI depending on the extent of calcifications on mammography was not proved. Considering the 62 cases of proved malignancy with measured maximal diameter at pathologic examination, both mammography and MR examination seem to overestimate tumor extent.
The not-perfect sensitivity of MRI (87%), when applying our interpretation criteria and imaging sequences, is a crucial point that prevents us from clinical use of MRI in the diagnosis of mammographically detected microcalcifications.

15 Reads
  • Source
    • "Some studies suggested dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging is not reliable in the differentiation of benign from malignant microcalcifications [10]–[13], while some studies indicated the dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging is able to differentiate benign from malignant disease associated with microcalcification with considerably greater accuracy than mammography or ultrasound [14]. This difference may come from the different population, the variation of magnetic field strength, breast coil specifications, pulse sequences and other parameters. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective The purpose of study was to prospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the differentiation of malignant lesions from benign ones in patients with BI-RADS 3–4 microcalcifications detected by mammography. Materials and Methods 93 women with 100 microcalcifications had undergone breast MRI from June 2010 to July 2013. Subsequently, 91 received open biopsy and 2 received stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy. All results were compared with histological findings. The PPV, NPV and area under curve (AUC) of the mammography and breast MRI were calculated. Results There were 31 (31.0%) BI-RADS 3 microcalcifications and 69 (69.0%) BI-RADS 4. The PPV and NPV of mammography is 65.2% (45/69) and 90.3% (28/31). The PPV and NPV of breast MRI was 90.2% (46/51) and 95.9% (47/49). Among 31 BI-RADS 3 microcalcifications, the PPV and NPV of breast MRI was 100% (3/3) and 100% (28/28). Among 69 BI-RADS 4 microcalcifications, the PPV and NPV of breast MRI was 89.6% (43/48) and 90.5% (19/21). The AUC of mammography and breast MRI assessment were 0.738 (95% CI, 0.639–0.837) and 0.931 (95% CI, 0.874–0.988) (p<0.05). Conclusion Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of breast is able to be applied to predict the risk of malignance before follow-up for BI-RADS 3 microcalcifications and biopsy for BI-RADS 4 microcalcifications.
    PLoS ONE 06/2014; 9(6):e99669. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0099669 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Knowing that allowed a better surgical planning in these patients. Previous MR studies have reported variable accuracy of MRI for classification of microcalcifications [17, 18]. Early studies suggested that dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI should not be used to assess microcalcifications [19, 20] because MRI is unable to identify small calcifications, which are typically associated with malignant disease. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose. To evaluate the correlation between MRI and histopathological findings in patients with mammographically detected 3–5 BI-RAD (Breast Imaging Reporting And Data Systems) microcalcifications and to allow a better surgical planning. Materials and Method. 62 female Patients (age 50 ± 12) with screening detected 3–5 BI-RAD microcalcifications underwent dynamic 3 T contrast-enhanced breast MRI. After 30-day (range 24–36 days) period, 55 Patients underwent biopsy using stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB), 5 Patients underwent stereotactic mammographically guided biopsy, and 2 Patients underwent MRI-guided VAB. Results. Microhistology examination demonstrated 36 malignant lesions and 26 benign lesions. The analysis of MRI findings identified 8 cases of MRI BI-RADS 5, 23 cases of MRI BI-RADS 4, 11 cases of MRI BI-RADS 3, 4 cases type A and 7 cases type B, and 20 cases of MRI BI-RADS 1-2. MRI sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 88.8%, 76.9%, 84.2%, and 83.3%, respectively.
    08/2011; 2011:643890. DOI:10.5402/2011/643890
  • Source
    • "(95% CI, .61 to .91) [114]. For calcifications alone, sensitivity was .68 (.45 to .86) and 1.00 (.72 to 1) for calcifications associated with masses. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article summarizes the modern evidence-based management of ductal carcinoma in situ. The data addressing the surgical issues, including indications for mastectomy and the use of sentinel node biopsy, are presented. The randomized trials examining the role of radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery and the use of tamoxifen in ductal carcinoma in situ are discussed. Factors to consider in developing a management strategy for the individual patient are elucidated in the final section.
    Surgical Clinics of North America 05/2007; 87(2):333-51, viii. DOI:10.1016/j.suc.2007.01.006 · 1.88 Impact Factor
Show more