The aim of our intra-individual comparison study was to investigate and compare the potential of radiomics analysis of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) of the breast for the non-invasive assessment of tumor invasiveness, hormone receptor status, and tumor grade in patients with primary breast cancer. This retrospective study included 48 female patients with 49 biopsy-proven breast cancers who underwent pretreatment breast CEM and MRI. Radiomics analysis was performed by using MaZda software. Radiomics parameters were correlated with tumor histology (invasive vs. non-invasive), hormonal status (HR+ vs. HR-), and grading (low grade G1 + G2 vs. high grade G3). CEM radiomics analysis yielded classification accuracies of up to 92% for invasive vs. non-invasive breast cancers, 95.6% for HR+ vs. HR- breast cancers, and 77.8% for G1 + G2 vs. G3 invasive cancers. MRI radiomics analysis yielded classification accuracies of up to 90% for invasive vs. non-invasive breast cancers, 82.6% for HR+ vs. HR- breast cancers, and 77.8% for G1+G2 vs. G3 cancers. Preliminary results indicate a potential of both radiomics analysis of DCE-MRI and CEM for non-invasive assessment of tumor-invasiveness, hormone receptor status, and tumor grade. CEM may serve as an alternative to MRI if MRI is not available or contraindicated.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Breast density, or the amount of fibroglandular tissue in the breast, has become a recognized and independent marker for breast cancer risk. Public awareness of breast density as a possible risk factor for breast cancer has resulted in legislation for risk stratification purposes in many US states. This review will provide a comprehensive overview of the currently available imaging modalities for qualitative and quantitative breast density assessment and the current evidence on breast density and breast cancer risk assessment. RECENT FINDINGS: To date, breast density assessment is mainly performed with mammography and to some extent with magnetic resonance imaging. Data indicate that computerized, quantitative techniques in comparison with subjective visual estimations are characterized by higher reproducibility and robustness. SUMMARY: Breast density reduces the sensitivity of mammography due to a masking effect and is also a recognized independent risk factor for breast cancer. Standardized breast density assessment using automated volumetric quantitative methods has the potential to be used for risk prediction and stratification and in determining the best screening plan for each woman.

MRI of the breast is the most sensitive test for breast cancer detection and outperforms conventional imaging with mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, or ultrasound. However, the long scan time and relatively high costs limit its widespread use. Hence, it is currently only routinely implemented in the screening of women at an increased risk of breast cancer. To overcome these limitations, abbreviated dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI protocols have been introduced that substantially shorten image acquisition and interpretation time while maintaining a high diagnostic accuracy. Efforts to develop abbreviated MRI protocols reflect the increasing scrutiny of the disproportionate contribution of radiology to the rising overall healthcare expenditures. Healthcare policy makers are now focusing on curbing the use of advanced imaging examinations such as MRI while continuing to promote the quality and appropriateness of imaging. An important cornerstone of value-based healthcare defines value as the patients outcome over costs. Therefore, the concept of a fast, abbreviated MRI exam is very appealing, given its high diagnostic accuracy coupled with the possibility of a marked reduction in the cost of an MRI examination. Given recent concerns about gadolinium-based contrast agents, unenhanced MRI techniques such as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) are also being investigated for breast cancer diagnosis. Although further larger prospective studies, standardized imaging protocol, and reproducibility studies are necessary, initial results with abbreviated MRI protocols suggest that it seems feasible to offer screening breast DCE-MRI to a broader population. This article aims to give an overview of abbreviated and fast breast MRI protocols, their utility for breast cancer detection, and their emerging role in the new value-based healthcare paradigm that has replaced the fee-for-service model. Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;49:e85-e100.

PURPOSE: To investigate the potential of contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) and radiomics analysis for the noninvasive differentiation of breast cancer invasiveness, hormone receptor status, and tumor grade. PROCEDURES: This retrospective study included 100 patients with 103 breast cancers who underwent pretreatment CEM. Radiomics analysis was performed using MAZDA software. Lesions were manually segmented. Radiomic features were derived from first-order histogram (HIS), co-occurrence matrix (COM), run length matrix (RLM), absolute gradient, autoregressive model, the discrete Haar wavelet transform (WAV), and lesion geometry. Fisher, probability of error and average correlation (POE+ACC), and mutual information (MI) coefficients informed feature selection. Linear discriminant analysis followed by k-nearest neighbor classification (with leave-one-out cross-validation) was used for pairwise texture-based separation of tumor invasiveness and hormone receptor status using histopathology as the standard of reference. RESULTS: Radiomics analysis achieved the highest accuracies of 87.4 % for differentiating invasive from noninvasive cancers based on COM+HIS/MI, 78.4 % for differentiating HR positive from HR negative cancers based on COM+HIS/Fisher, 97.2 % for differentiating human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive/HR-negative from HER2-negative/HR-positive cancers based on RLM+WAV/MI, 100 % for differentiating triple-negative from triple-positive breast cancers mainly based on COM+WAV+HIS/POE+ACC, and 82.1 % for differentiating triple-negative from HR-positive cancers mainly based on WAV+HIS/Fisher. Accuracies for differentiating grade 1 vs. grades 2 and 3 cancers were 90 % for invasive cancers (based on COM/MI) and 100 % for noninvasive cancers (almost entirely based on COM/MI). CONCLUSIONS: Radiomics analysis with CEM has potential for noninvasive differentiation of tumors with different degrees of invasiveness, hormone receptor status, and tumor grade.

We evaluated the performance of radiomics and artificial intelligence (AI) from multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the assessment of breast cancer molecular subtypes. Ninety-one breast cancer patients who underwent 3T dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping were included retrospectively. Radiomic features were extracted from manually drawn regions of interest (n = 704 features per lesion) on initial DCE-MRI and ADC maps. The ten best features for subtype separation were selected using probability of error and average correlation coefficients. For pairwise comparisons with >20 patients in each group, a multi-layer perceptron feed-forward artificial neural network (MLP-ANN) was used (70% of cases for training, 30%, for validation, five times each). For all other separations, linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and leave-one-out cross-validation were applied. Histopathology served as the reference standard. MLP-ANN yielded an overall median area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.86 (0.77-0.92) for the separation of triple negative (TN) from other cancers. The separation of luminal A and TN cancers yielded an overall median AUC of 0.8 (0.75-0.83). Radiomics and AI from multiparametric MRI may aid in the non-invasive differentiation of TN and luminal A breast cancers from other subtypes.

PURPOSE: To investigate the utility of mammography for breast cancer screening in a population of males at increased risk for breast cancer. METHODS: In this HIPAA-compliant institutional review board-approved single-institution study, mammography records and clinical data of 827 male patients who underwent digital mammography from September 2011-July 2018 were analyzed via the electronic medical record. 664 of these men presented with masses, pain, or nipple discharge and were excluded from this study. The remaining 163 asymptomatic men with familial and/or personal history of breast cancer, or with a known germline mutation in BRCA, underwent screening mammography and were included in this analysis. RESULTS: 163 asymptomatic men (age: mean 63 years, range 24-87 years) underwent 806 screening mammograms. 125/163 (77%) had a personal history of breast cancer and 72/163 (44%) had a family history of breast cancer. 24/163 (15%) were known mutation carriers: 4/24 (17%) BRCA1 and 20/24 (83%) BRCA2. 792/806 (98%) of the screening mammograms were negative (BI-RADS 1 or 2); 10/806 (1.2%) were classified as BI-RADS 3, all of which were eventually downgraded to BI-RADS 2 on follow-up. 4/806 (0.4%) mammograms were abnormal (BI-RADS 4/5): all were malignant. The cancer detection rate in this cohort was 4.9 cancers/1000 examinations. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, screening mammography yielded a cancer detection rate of 4.9 cancers/1000 examinations which is like the detection rate of screening mammography in a population of women at average risk, indicating that screening mammography is of value in male patients at high risk for breast cancer.

Our study aimed to evaluate if breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant treatment could affect the morphological features of axillary and intramammary lymph nodes on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with invasive breast cancer and clinically negative axilla. In this single-center study, we retrospectively evaluated 50 patients who had (a) breast-conserving surgery, (b) clinically negative axilla, (c) preoperative MRI within 3 months before surgery, and (d) postoperative MRI within 12 months after surgery. Axillary and intramammary lymph nodes on postoperative MRI were identified and then compared with preoperative MRI by two breast radiologists with regards to the following: enlargement, cortical thickening, presence of fatty hilum, irregularity, heterogeneity, matting, and axillary lymph node asymmetry. Three hundred and two axillary and eight intramammary lymph nodes were evaluated. Enlargement and cortical thickening were seen in 5/50 (10%) patients in three axillary and two intramammary lymph nodes. None of the lymph nodes on postoperative MRI demonstrated occurrence of lack of fatty hilum, irregularity, heterogeneity, matting or axillary lymph node asymmetry. No evidence of recurrence was observed on 2-year follow-up. Lymph node enlargement and cortical thickening may be observed in a few patients in the postoperative period. Nevertheless, in patients with clinically negative axilla, these changes in morphology are often related to treatment rather than malignancy and favor short-term follow-up as an alternative to lymph node biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether no enhancement on pre-treatment MRI can rule out malignancy of additional US mass(es) initially assessed as BI-RADS 3 or 4 in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer. METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive women from 2010-2018 with newly diagnosed breast cancer; at least one additional breast mass (distinct from index cancer) assigned a BI-RADS 3 or 4 on US; and a bilateral contrast-enhanced breast MRI performed within 90 days of US. All malignant masses were pathologically proven; benign masses were pathologically proven or defined as showing at least 2 years of imaging stability. Incidence of malignant masses and NPV were calculated on a per-patient level using proportions and exact 95% CIs. RESULTS: In 230 patients with 309 additional masses, 140/309 (45%) masses did not enhance while 169/309 (55%) enhanced on MRI. Of the 140 masses seen in 105 women (mean age, 54 years; range 28-82) with no enhancement on MRI, all had adequate follow-up and 140/140 (100%) were benign, of which 89/140 (63.6%) were pathologically proven and 51/140 (36.4%) demonstrated at least 2 years of imaging stability. Pre-treatment MRI demonstrating no enhancement of US mass correlate(s) had an NPV of 100% (95% CI 96.7-100.0). CONCLUSIONS: All BI-RADS 3 and 4 US masses with a non-enhancing correlate on pre-treatment MRI were benign. The incorporation of MRI, when ordered by the referring physician, may decrease unnecessary follow-up imaging and/or biopsy if the initial US BI-RADS assessment and management recommendation were to be retrospectively updated. KEY POINTS: • Of 309 BI-RADS 3 or 4 US masses with a corresponding mass on MRI, 140/309 (45%) demonstrated no enhancement whereas 169/309 (55%) demonstrated enhancement • All masses classified as BI-RADS 3 or 4 on US without enhancement on MRI were benign • MRI can rule out malignancy in non-enhancing US masses with an NPV of 100.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if histogram analysis and visually assessed heterogeneity of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping can predict molecular subtypes of invasive breast cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 91 patients with invasive breast carcinoma who underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with DWI at our institution were included. Two radiologists delineated a 2-D region of interest (ROI) on ADC maps in consensus. Tumors were also independently classified into low and high heterogeneity based on visual assessment of DWI. First-order statistics extracted through histogram analysis within the ROI of the ADC maps (mean, 10th percentile, 50th percentile, 90th percentile, standard deviation, kurtosis, and skewness) and visually assessed heterogeneity were evaluated for associations with tumor receptor status (ER, PR, and HER2 status) as well as molecular subtype. RESULTS: HER2-positive lesions demonstrated significantly higher mean (p=0.034), Perc50 (p=0.046), and Perc90 (p=0.040), with AUCs of 0.605, 0.592, and 0.652, respectively, than HER2-negative lesions. No significant differences were found in the histogram values for ER and PR statuses. Neither quantitative histogram analysis based on ADC maps nor qualitative visual heterogeneity assessment of DWI images was able to significantly differentiate between molecular subtypes, i.e., luminal A versus all other subtypes (luminal B, HER2-enriched, and triple negative) combined, luminal A and B combined versus HER2-enriched and triple negative combined, and triple negative versus all other types combined. CONCLUSION: Histogram analysis and visual heterogeneity assessment cannot be used to differentiate molecular subtypes of invasive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Available data proving the value of DWI for breast cancer diagnosis is mainly for enhancing masses; DWI may be less sensitive and specific in non-mass enhancement (NME) lesions. The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of DWI using different ROI measurement approaches and ADC metrics in breast lesions presenting as NME lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 95 patients who underwent multiparametric MRI with DCE and DWI from September 2007 to July 2013 and who were diagnosed with a suspicious NME (BI-RADS 4/5) were included. Twenty-nine patients were excluded for lesion non-visibility on DWI (n = 24: 12 benign and 12 malignant) and poor DWI quality (n = 5: 1 benign and 4 malignant). Two readers independently assessed DWI and DCE-MRI findings in two separate randomized readings using different ADC metrics and ROI approaches. NME lesions were classified as either benign (> 1.3 × 10-3 mm2/s) or malignant (≤ 1.3 × 10-3 mm2/s). Histopathology was the standard of reference. ROC curves were plotted, and AUCs were determined. Concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was measured. RESULTS: There were 39 malignant (59%) and 27 benign (41%) lesions in 66 (65 women, 1 man) patients (mean age, 51.8 years). The mean ADC value of the darkest part of the tumor (Dptu) achieved the highest diagnostic accuracy, with AUCs of up to 0.71. Inter-reader agreement was highest with Dptu ADC max (CCC 0.42) and lowest with the point tumor (Ptu) ADC min (CCC = - 0.01). Intra-reader agreement was highest with Wtu ADC mean (CCC = 0.44 for reader 1, 0.41 for reader 2), but this was not associated with the highest diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic accuracy of DWI with ADC mapping is limited in NME lesions. Thirty-one percent of lesions presenting as NME on DCE-MRI could not be evaluated with DWI, and therefore, DCE-MRI remains indispensable. Best results were achieved using Dptu 2D ROI measurement and ADC mean.