Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Ultrafast MRI and T1 and T2 Radiomics for Predicting Invasive Components in Ductal Carcinoma in Situ Diagnosed With Percutaneous Needle Biopsy

  • Min Young Kim (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Heera Yoen (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Hye Ji (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Sang Joon Park (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Sun Mi Kim (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Wonshik Han (Department of Surgery and Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Nariya Cho (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital)
  • Received : 2022.08.18
  • Accepted : 2023.09.05
  • Published : 2023.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of ultrafast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and radiomic features derived from breast MRI for predicting the upstaging of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosed using percutaneous needle biopsy. Materials and Methods: Between August 2018 and June 2020, 95 patients with 98 DCIS lesions who underwent preoperative breast MRI, including an ultrafast sequence, and subsequent surgery were included. Four ultrafast MRI parameters were analyzed: time-to-enhancement, maximum slope (MS), area under the curve for 60 s after enhancement, and time-to-peak enhancement. One hundred and seven radiomic features were extracted for the whole tumor on the first post-contrast T1WI and T2WI using PyRadiomics. Clinicopathological characteristics, ultrafast MRI findings, and radiomic features were compared between the pure DCIS and DCIS with invasion groups. Prediction models, incorporating clinicopathological, ultrafast MRI, and radiomic features, were developed. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate model performance in distinguishing between the two groups using leave-one-out cross-validation. Results: Thirty-six of the 98 lesions (36.7%) were confirmed to have invasive components after surgery. Compared to the pure DCIS group, the DCIS with invasion group had a higher nuclear grade (P < 0.001), larger mean lesion size (P = 0.038), larger mean MS (P = 0.002), and different radiomic-related characteristics, including a more extensive tumor volume; higher maximum gray-level intensity; coarser, more complex, and heterogeneous texture; and a greater concentration of high gray-level intensity. No significant differences in AUCs were found between the model incorporating nuclear grade and lesion size (0.687) and the models integrating additional ultrafast MRI and radiomic features (0.680-0.732). Conclusion: High nuclear grade, larger lesion size, larger MS, and multiple radiomic features were associated with DCIS upstaging. However, the addition of MS and radiomic features to the prediction model did not significantly improve the prediction performance.

Keywords

References

  1. Esserman L, Yau C. Rethinking the standard for ductal carcinoma in situ treatment. JAMA Oncol 2015;1:881-883 
  2. Korean Breast Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts & figures 2020. Seoul: Korean Breast Cancer Society, 2020:8-9 
  3. Cady B. How to prevent invasive breast cancer: detect and excise duct carcinoma in situ. J Surg Oncol 1998;69:60-62 
  4. Cowell CF, Weigelt B, Sakr RA, Ng CK, Hicks J, King TA, et al. Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: revisited. Mol Oncol 2013;7:859-869 
  5. Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L, van Leeuwen-Stok AE, Skinner VP, Dif N, et al. Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ - The LORD study. Eur J Cancer 2015;51:1497-1510 
  6. Francis A, Thomas J, Fallowfield L, Wallis M, Bartlett JM, Brookes C, et al. Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS; the LORIS trial. Eur J Cancer 2015;51:2296-2303 
  7. Hwang ES, Hyslop T, Lynch T, Frank E, Pinto D, Basila D, et al. The COMET (Comparison of Operative versus Monitoring and Endocrine Therapy) trial: a phase III randomised controlled clinical trial for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). BMJ Open 2019;9:e026797 
  8. Brennan ME, Turner RM, Ciatto S, Marinovich ML, French JR, Macaskill P, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ at core-needle biopsy: meta-analysis of underestimation and predictors of invasive breast cancer. Radiology 2011;260:119-128 
  9. Greenwood HI, Wilmes LJ, Kelil T, Joe BN. Role of breast MRI in the evaluation and detection of DCIS: opportunities and challenges. J Magn Reson Imaging 2020;52:697-709 
  10. Alic L, Niessen WJ, Veenland JF. Quantification of heterogeneity as a biomarker in tumor imaging: a systematic review. PLoS One 2014;9:e110300 
  11. Chou SS, Gombos EC, Chikarmane SA, Giess CS, Jayender J. Computer-aided heterogeneity analysis in breast MR imaging assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ: correlating histologic grade and receptor status. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017;46:1748-1759 
  12. Ko ES, Kim JH, Lim Y, Han BK, Cho EY, Nam SJ. Assessment of invasive breast cancer heterogeneity using whole-tumor magnetic resonance imaging texture analysis: correlations with detailed pathological findings. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e2453 
  13. Chang RF, Chen HH, Chang YC, Huang CS, Chen JH, Lo CM. Quantification of breast tumor heterogeneity for ER status, HER2 status, and TN molecular subtype evaluation on DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2016;34:809-819 
  14. Sutton EJ, Oh JH, Dashevsky BZ, Veeraraghavan H, Apte AP, Thakur SB, et al. Breast cancer subtype intertumor heterogeneity: MRI-based features predict results of a genomic assay. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015;42:1398-1406 
  15. Lee SH, Park H, Ko ES. Radiomics in breast imaging from techniques to clinical applications: a review. Korean J Radiol 2020;21:779-792 
  16. Li J, Song Y, Xu S, Wang J, Huang H, Ma W, et al. Predicting underestimation of ductal carcinoma in situ: a comparison between radiomics and conventional approaches. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2019;14:709-721 
  17. Hou R, Grimm LJ, Mazurowski MA, Marks JR, King LM, Maley CC, et al. Prediction of upstaging in ductal carcinoma in situ based on mammographic radiomic features. Radiology 2022;303:54-62 
  18. Hong M, Fan S, Yu Z, Gao C, Fang Z, Du L, et al. Evaluating upstaging in ductal carcinoma in situ using preoperative MRI-based radiomics. J Magn Reson Imaging 2023;58:454-463 
  19. Lee HJ, Park JH, Nguyen AT, Do LN, Park MH, Lee JS, et al. Prediction of the histologic upgrade of ductal carcinoma in situ using a combined radiomics and machine learning approach based on breast dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Front Oncol 2022;12:1032809 
  20. Wu Z, Lin Q, Wang H, Wang G, Fu G, Bian T. An MRI-based radiomics nomogram to distinguish ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion from ductal carcinoma in situ of breast cancer. Acad Radiol 2023;30 Suppl 2:S71-S81 
  21. Mann RM, Mus RD, van Zelst J, Geppert C, Karssemeijer N, Platel B. A novel approach to contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging for screening: high-resolution ultrafast dynamic imaging. Invest Radiol 2014;49:579-585 
  22. Mus RD, Borelli C, Bult P, Weiland E, Karssemeijer N, Barentsz JO, et al. Time to enhancement derived from ultrafast breast MRI as a novel parameter to discriminate benign from malignant breast lesions. Eur J Radiol 2017;89:90-96 
  23. Kim SY, Cho N, Choi Y, Shin SU, Kim ES, Lee SH, et al. Ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI: lesion conspicuity and size assessment according to background parenchymal enhancement. Korean J Radiol 2020;21:561-571 
  24. Goto M, Sakai K, Yokota H, Kiba M, Yoshida M, Imai H, et al. Diagnostic performance of initial enhancement analysis using ultra-fast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2019;29:1164-1174 
  25. Heacock L, Lewin AA, Gao Y, Babb JS, Heller SL, Melsaether AN, et al. Feasibility analysis of early temporal kinetics as a surrogate marker for breast tumor type, grade, and aggressiveness. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018;47:1692-1700 
  26. Shin SU, Cho N, Kim SY, Lee SH, Chang JM, Moon WK. Time-to-enhancement at ultrafast breast DCE-MRI: potential imaging biomarker of tumour aggressiveness. Eur Radiol 2020;30:4058-4068 
  27. American College of Radiology. ACR BI-RADS(R) Atlas. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 5th ed. Reston: American College of Radiology, 2013 
  28. van Griethuysen JJM, Fedorov A, Parmar C, Hosny A, Aucoin N, Narayan V, et al. Computational radiomics system to decode the radiographic phenotype. Cancer Res 2017;77:e104-e107 
  29. Lamb LR, Lehman CD, Oseni TO, Bahl M. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at breast MRI: predictors of upgrade to invasive carcinoma. Acad Radiol 2020;27:1394-1399 
  30. Heo S, Park AY, Jung HK, Ko KH, Kim Y, Koh J. The usefulness of ultrafast MRI evaluation for predicting histologic upgrade of ductal carcinoma in situ. Eur J Radiol 2021;136:109519 
  31. El Hage Chehade H, Headon H, Wazir U, Abtar H, Kasem A, Mokbel K. Is sentinel lymph node biopsy indicated in patients with a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg 2017;213:171-180 
  32. Onishi N, Sadinski M, Hughes MC, Ko ES, Gibbs P, Gallagher KM, et al. Ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI may generate prognostic imaging markers of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2020;22:58 
  33. Miceli R, Gao Y, Qian K, Heller SL. Predicting upgrade of ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer at surgery with ultrafast imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2023;221:34-43 
  34. Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretiere JM, Meunier M, Lucidarme O, Tardivon AA, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaging-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1995;196:415-419 
  35. Hulka CA, Edmister WB, Smith BL, Tan L, Sgroi DC, Campbell T, et al. Dynamic echo-planar imaging of the breast: experience in diagnosing breast carcinoma and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1997;205:837-842 
  36. Oshida K, Nagashima T, Ueda T, Yagata H, Tanabe N, Nakano S, et al. Pharmacokinetic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using dynamic MR mammography. Eur Radiol 2005;15:1353-1360 
  37. Mori N, Abe H, Mugikura S, Takasawa C, Sato S, Miyashita M, et al. Ultrafast dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI: kinetic curve assessment using empirical mathematical model validated with histological microvessel density. Acad Radiol 2019;26:e141-e149 
  38. Bluff JE, Menakuru SR, Cross SS, Higham SE, Balasubramanian SP, Brown NJ, et al. Angiogenesis is associated with the onset of hyperplasia in human ductal breast disease. Br J Cancer 2009;101:666-672 
  39. Vincent-Salomon A, Lucchesi C, Gruel N, Raynal V, Pierron G, Goudefroye R, et al. Integrated genomic and transcriptomic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:1956-1965 
  40. Sinha VC, Piwnica-Worms H. Intratumoral heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ: chaos and consequence. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2018;23:191-205