Faculty Bibliography

Purpose Our aim was to evaluate the accuracy of a new algorithm to automatically delineate the breast region from the chest on T1-weighted, non-fat-suppressed MR images. This process is also referred to as the chest wall detection. There is a general agreement that this step is very difficult to automate. At the same time it is crucially needed for clinically important processing workflows [1]. These workflows include 3D measurement of breast density and of the breast parenchymal enhancement. Both measures reveal patients at risk of breast cancer [2]. Manually traced chest wall was used as the ground truth when estimating the segmentation errors. Segmentation accuracy was evaluated using the Hausdorff distance and the volumetric error. We also estimated the inter-observer agreement in defining the chest wall surface. Methods The program starts by generating the mid-sagittal 2D section by averaging the signal across 20 mm thick mid-sagittal slab. We determine the chest wall boundary on this image by modeling the signal profiles along the antero-posterior direction as a sequence of three tissues: background air, skin and fat layer, muscle. Non-uniformity correction is then applied to the entire 3D volume. The mid-sagittal boundary, represented as a polyline P, is then propagated in two opposite (left and right) directions. At each sagittal section the algorithm adjusts the control points of the polyline received from an adjacent slice. The adjustment is estimated from the weighted sum of six measures that combine specific local and global signal statistics. These include: the local gradient, the signal uniformity, the gradient similarity, the contour-gradient consistency, the global contour uniformity and the normal vector consistency. At each iteration we form a candidate shift vector, we apply it to shift P to its new position, and then we smooth the resulting polyline. The process terminates when the magnitude of the shift becomes negligible or when the specified number of iterations is exceeded. Two metrics were used to estimate accuracy. The conventional volumetric error was obtained by dividing the volume DV of misclassified breast voxels over the true breast volume V. The Hausdorff distance, HD, is the distance between each voxel on the true breast/ chest wall border and the closest boundary voxel produced by the algorithm. HD is averaged over the entire chest wall surface. From a clinical database of screening breast MRIs acquired at our medical center we have randomly selected 16 test exams. The selection was constrained to enforce that there were four exams in each of the four breast density categories [3]. Bilateral breasts were imaged on Siemens 3T Magnetom Trio equipped with a 7-element surface breast coil. The parameters of the T1-weighted non-fat-suppressed sequence were: TR = 4.74 ms, TE = 1.79 ms, FOV = 320 mm2, matrix = 448 9 358 9*150, 0.7 9 0.7 9 1.1 mm voxels, TA = 2-3 min. Three experts in breast and chest anatomy drew contours to separate the chest wall from the breast (Fig. 1). The pectoralis fascia and pectoralis muscles were used as reference points for the anterolateral borders. The medial border of the axilla was the posterolateral boundary. The axillary tail was considered as the breast tissue. The ground truth references were constructed by a software designed to perform voxel-based ROI averaging [4]. (Figure Presented) Results The border distance error HD was 0.84 +/- 0.8 mm (average +/- standard deviation) and ranged from 0.57 to 2.45 mm. The volume error DV/V was 6.43 +/- 6.82%. There was no correlation between the HD and DV/V (R2 = 0.23, p = 0.12). The test cases covered a wide range 411-3439 ml of breast volumes. There was a significant positive correlation (R2 = 0.40, p = 0.02) between volumetric error and the true breast volume V, but there was no correlation between HD and V (R2 = 0.08, p = 0.44). The average execution time was under 1.5 min per case on a standard 8-core workstation. The inter-observer agreement measured in term of HD was 0.56 +/- 0.15 mm (average +/- standard deviation). The agreement expressed in terms of volumetric discrepancy (relative to breast volume) was 1.61% +/- 0.71%. Conclusion Breast density, defined as fraction of fibroglandular tissue, and postcontrast enhancement, are considered significant risk factors for breast cancer. These MRI measures are recommended for radiologic reports and are promising cancer biomarkers. Radiologists currently visually estimate these measure. Unfortunately, readers agreement for qualitative evaluation is only fair, requiring better standardization and reproducibility. Computer-assisted quantitative assessment is needed, but the task is challenging due to image nonuniformity (breast coils cause loss of MR signal in remote regions) and to the anatomical complexity of chest wall boundary (Fig. 2). (Figure Presented) Given its accuracy and speed, our breast segmentation method appears to be ready for clinical use as a part of larger workflow to generate routine diagnostic reports

PURPOSE: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (18 F-FDG-PET) independently correlate with malignancy in breast cancer, but the relationship between their structural and metabolic metrics is not completely understood. This study spatially correlates diffusion, perfusion, and glucose avidity in breast cancer with simultaneous PET/MR imaging and compares correlations with clinical prognostics. METHODS: In this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant prospective study, with written informed consent and approval of the institutional review board and using simultaneously acquired FDG-PET and DWI, tissue diffusion (Dt ), and perfusion fraction (fp ) from intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) analysis were registered to FDG-PET within 14 locally advanced breast cancers. Lesions were analyzed using 2D histograms and correlation coefficients between Dt , fp , and standardized uptake value (SUV). Correlations were compared with prognostics from biopsy, metastatic burden from whole-body PET, and treatment history. RESULTS: SUV||Dt correlation coefficient significantly distinguished treated (0.11 +/- 0.24) from nontreated (-0.33 +/- 0.26) patients (P = 0.005). SUV||fp correlations were on average negative for the whole cohort (-0.17 +/- 0.13). CONCLUSION: Simultaneously acquired and registered FDG-PET/DWI allowed quantifiable descriptions of breast cancer microenvironments that may provide a framework for monitoring and predicting response to treatment. Magn Reson Med, 2016. (c) 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

PURPOSE: To compare a novel multicoil compressed sensing technique with flexible temporal resolution, golden-angle radial sparse parallel (GRASP), to conventional fat-suppressed spoiled three-dimensional (3D) gradient-echo (volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination, VIBE) MRI in evaluating the conspicuity of benign and malignant breast lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March and August 2015, 121 women (24-84 years; mean, 49.7 years) with 180 biopsy-proven benign and malignant lesions were imaged consecutively at 3.0 Tesla in a dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI exam using sagittal T1-weighted fat-suppressed 3D VIBE in this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, retrospective study. Subjects underwent MRI-guided breast biopsy (mean, 13 days [1-95 days]) using GRASP DCE-MRI, a fat-suppressed radial "stack-of-stars" 3D FLASH sequence with golden-angle ordering. Three readers independently evaluated breast lesions on both sequences. Statistical analysis included mixed models with generalized estimating equations, kappa-weighted coefficients and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: All lesions demonstrated good conspicuity on VIBE and GRASP sequences (4.28 +/- 0.81 versus 3.65 +/- 1.22), with no significant difference in lesion detection (P = 0.248). VIBE had slightly higher lesion conspicuity than GRASP for all lesions, with VIBE 12.6% (0.63/5.0) more conspicuous (P < 0.001). Masses and nonmass enhancement (NME) were more conspicuous on VIBE (P < 0.001), with a larger difference for NME (14.2% versus 9.4% more conspicuous). Malignant lesions were more conspicuous than benign lesions (P < 0.001) on both sequences. CONCLUSION: GRASP DCE-MRI, a multicoil compressed sensing technique with high spatial resolution and flexible temporal resolution, has near-comparable performance to conventional VIBE imaging for breast lesion evaluation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2016.

Breast and whole-body PET/MR imaging is being used to detect local and metastatic disease and is being investigated for potential imaging biomarkers, which may eventually help personalize treatments and prognoses. This article provides an overview of breast and whole-body PET/MR exam techniques, summarizes PET and MR breast imaging for lesion detection, outlines investigations into multi-parametric breast PET/MR, looks at breast PET/MR in the setting of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and reviews the pros and cons of whole-body PET/MR in the setting of metastatic or suspected metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical applicability of fibroglandular tissue (FGT) segmentation on routine T1 weighted breast MRI and compare FGT quantification with radiologist assessment. METHODS: FGT was segmented on 232 breasts and quantified, and was assessed qualitatively by four breast imagers. RESULTS: FGT segmentation was successful in all 232 breasts. Agreement between radiologists and quantified FGT was moderate to substantial (kappa=0.52-0.67); lower quantified FGT was associated with disagreement between radiologists and quantified FGT (P