Quantitative gadopentetate‐enhanced MRI of breast tumors: Testing of different analytic methods

This study assessed several proposed imaging strategies and analytic methods based on gadopentetate‐enhanced MRI to differentiate benign from malignant breast tumors in a blinded experimental animal study. Steady‐state dynamic MRI and first‐pass imaging, performed with either T1‐ or T*2‐ weighted se...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Magnetic resonance in medicine 2000-12, Vol.44 (6), p.915-924
Main Authors: Helbich, Thomas H., Roberts, Timothy P.L., Gossmann, Axel, Wendland, Michael F., Shames, David M., Adachi, Mitchell, Yang, Su, Huber, Sabine, Daldrup, Heike, Brasch, Robert C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alkylating Agents
Animals
breast neoplasm
Carcinogens
Contrast Media
dynamic contrast enhancement
Ethylnitrosourea
Female
Gadolinium DTPA
magnetic resonance
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - instrumentation
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data
Mammary Glands, Animal - pathology
Mammary Neoplasms, Experimental - chemically induced
Mammary Neoplasms, Experimental - diagnosis
Mammary Neoplasms, Experimental - pathology
perfusion
permeability
Rats
Rats, Sprague-Dawley
Time Factors
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study assessed several proposed imaging strategies and analytic methods based on gadopentetate‐enhanced MRI to differentiate benign from malignant breast tumors in a blinded experimental animal study. Steady‐state dynamic MRI and first‐pass imaging, performed with either T1‐ or T*2‐ weighted sequences, were compared. Semiquantitative and quantitative analysis methods, based on empirical measures of the data or physiological models, were subsequently applied to the imaging datasets. Comparative measures provided pathologic distinction of benign from malignant tumors, tumor grading, and histologic determination of microvascular density. Of the eight tested methods, only one, an estimate of first‐pass perfusion using T *2‐weighted imaging, showed an almost significant (P = 0.05) difference between benign and malignant tumors and correlated almost significantly (r = .3, P = 0.06) with the tumor grade. All other tests, performed either with steady‐state imaging or with T1‐weighted first‐pass imaging, failed to differentiate benign from malignant tumors. In addition, they yielded poor correlations with tumor grade and microvascular density. Magn Reson Med 44:915–924, 2000. © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
ISSN:0740-3194
1522-2594
DOI:10.1002/1522-2594(200012)44:6<915::AID-MRM13>3.0.CO;2-S