Spatiotemporal analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for differentiating between malignant and benign breast lesions
Chen C, Turco S, Kapetas P, Mann R, Wijkstra H, de Korte C, Mischi M.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to apply spatiotemporal analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) loops to quantify the enhancement heterogeneity for improving the differentiation between benign and malignant breast lesions.
Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 120 women (age range, 18-82 years; mean, 52 years) scheduled for ultrasound-guided biopsy. With the aid of brightness-mode images, the border of each breast lesion was delineated in the CEUS images. Based on visual evaluation and quantitative metrics, the breast lesions were categorized into four grades of different levels of contrast enhancement. Grade-1 (hyper-enhanced) and grade-2 (partly-enhanced) breast lesions were included in the analysis. Four parameters reflecting enhancement heterogeneity were estimated by spatiotemporal analysis of neighboring time-intensity curves (TICs). By setting the threshold on mean parameter, the diagnostic performance of the four parameters for differentiating benign and malignant lesions was evaluated.
Results: Sixty-four of the 120 patients were categorized as grade 1 or 2 and used for estimating the four parameters. At the pixel level, mutual information and conditional entropy present significantly different values between the benign and malignant lesions (p < 0.001 in patients of grade 1, p = 0.002 in patients of grade 1 or 2). For the classification of breast lesions, mutual information produces the best diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.893 in patients of grade 1, AUC = 0.848 in patients of grade 1 or 2).
Conclusions: The proposed spatiotemporal analysis for assessing the enhancement heterogeneity shows promising results to aid in the diagnosis of breast cancer by CEUS.
Clinical relevance statement: The proposed spatiotemporal method can be developed as a standardized software to automatically quantify the enhancement heterogeneity of breast cancer on CEUS, possibly leading to the improved diagnostic accuracy of differentiation between benign and malignant lesions.
Key points: • Advanced spatiotemporal analysis of ultrasound contrast-enhanced loops for aiding the differentiation of malignant or benign breast lesions. • Four parameters reflecting the enhancement heterogeneity were estimated in the hyper- and partly-enhanced breast lesions by analyzing the neighboring pixel-level time-intensity curves. • For the classification of hyper-enhanced breast lesions, mutual information produces the best diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.893).
Keywords: Breast neoplasms; Diagnostic imaging; Microbubbles.
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Radiology.
Similar articles
- Quantitative Multiparametric Breast Ultrasound: Application of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Elastography Leads to an Improved Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Lesions.Kapetas P, Clauser P, Woitek R, Wengert GJ, Lazar M, Pinker K, Helbich TH, Baltzer PAT.Invest Radiol. 2019 May;54(5):257-264. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000543.PMID: 30632985 Free PMC article.
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound is helpful in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions.Zhao H, Xu R, Ouyang Q, Chen L, Dong B, Huihua Y.Eur J Radiol. 2010 Feb;73(2):288-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.043. Epub 2009 Jun 25.PMID: 19559551
- Prospective evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of breast BI-RADS 3-5 lesions.Janu E, Krikavova L, Little J, Dvorak K, Brancikova D, Jandakova E, Pavlik T, Kovalcikova P, Kazda T, Valek V.BMC Med Imaging. 2020 Jun 17;20(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12880-020-00467-2.PMID: 32552678 Free PMC article.
- Meta-analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions.Hu Q, Wang XY, Zhu SY, Kang LK, Xiao YJ, Zheng HY.Acta Radiol. 2015 Jan;56(1):25-33. doi: 10.1177/0284185113517115. Epub 2014 Jan 16.PMID: 24436445 Review.
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound examination of the breast: a literature review.Drudi FM, Cantisani V, Gnecchi M, Malpassini F, Di Leo N, de Felice C.Ultraschall Med. 2012 Dec;33(7):E1-E7. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1299408. Epub 2012 May 23.PMID: 22623129 Review.
See all similar articles
References
- Siegel RL, Miler KD, Jemal A (2019) Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin 69:7–34
- Myers ER, Moorman P, Gierisch JM et al (2015) Benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: a systematic review. JAMA 314:1615–1634
- Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB et al (2008) Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 299:2151–2163
- Brem RF, Lenihan MJ, Lieberman J, Torrente J (2015) Screening breast ultrasound: past, present, and future. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:234–240
- Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D et al (2010) Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 7:18–27 - DOI - PubMed
Show all 34 references
MeSH terms
- Adolescent
- Adult
- Aged
- Aged, 80 and over
- Breast Neoplasms* / diagnostic imaging
- Contrast Media*
- Diagnosis, Differential
- Female
- Humans
- Image Enhancement / methods
- Middle Aged
- Retrospective Studies
- Spatio-Temporal Analysis
- Ultrasonography, Mammary* / methods
- Young Adult
Substances
- Contrast Media
Related information
LinkOut - more resources
-
Full Text Sources
-
Medical