Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Breast MRI during lactation: effects on tumor conspicuity using dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) in comparison with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parametric maps

  • Breast
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the effect of lactation on breast cancer conspicuity on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI in comparison with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parametric maps.

Materials and methods

Eleven lactating patients with 16 biopsy-confirmed pregnancy-associated breast cancer (PABC) lesions were prospectively evaluated by DCE and DTI on a 1.5-T MRI for pre-treatment evaluation. Additionally, DCE datasets of 16 non-lactating age-matched breast cancer patients were retrospectively reviewed, as control. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) comprising two regions of interests of the normal parenchyma was used to assess the differences in the tumor conspicuity on DCE subtraction images between lactating and non-lactating patients, as well as in comparison against DTI parametric maps of λ1, λ2, λ3, mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy (FA), and maximal anisotropy index, λ1–λ3.

Results

CNR values of breast cancer on DCE MRI among lactating patients were reduced by 62% and 58% (p < 0.001) in comparison with those in non-lactating patients, when taking into account the normal contralateral parenchyma and an area of marked background parenchymal enhancement (BPE), respectively. Among the lactating patients, DTI parameters of λ1, λ2, λ3, MD, and λ1–λ3 were significantly decreased, and FA was significantly increased in PABC, relative to the normal lactating parenchyma ROIs. When compared against DCE in the lactating cohort, the CNR on λ1, λ2, λ3, and MD was significantly superior, providing up to 138% more tumor conspicuity, on average.

Conclusion

Breast cancer conspicuity on DCE MRI is markedly reduced during lactation owing to the marked BPE. However, the additional application of DTI can improve the visualization and quantitative characterization of PABC, therefore possibly suggesting an additive value in the diagnostic workup of PABC.

Key Points

• Breast cancer conspicuity on DCE MRI has decreased by approximately 60% among lactating patients compared with non-lactating controls.

• DTI-derived diffusion coefficients and the anisotropy indices of PABC lesions were significantly different than those of the normal lactating fibroglandular tissue.

• Among lactating patients, breast cancer conspicuity on DTI-derived parametric maps provided up to 138% increase in contrast-to-noise ratio compared with DCE imaging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ADC:

Apparent diffusion coefficient

BPE:

Background parenchymal enhancement

CNR:

Contrast-to-noise ratio

DCE:

Dynamic contrast-enhanced

DCIS:

Ductal carcinoma in situ

DTI:

Diffusion tensor imaging

FA:

Fractional anisotropy

FOV:

Field of view

IDC:

Invasive ductal carcinoma

ILC:

Invasive lobular carcinoma

MD:

Mean diffusivity

PABC:

Pregnancy-associated breast cancer

ROI:

Region of interest

TE:

Echo time

TR:

Repetition time

References

  1. McManaman JL, Neville MC (2003) Mammary physiology and milk secretion. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 55:629–641

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vashi R, Hooley R, Butler R, Geisel J, Philpotts L (2013) Breast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: physiologic changes and common benign entities. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200:329–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Andersson TM, Johansson AL, Hsieh CC, Cnattingius S, Lambe M (2009) Increasing incidence of pregnancy-associated breast cancer in Sweden. Obstet Gynecol 114(3):568–572

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Langer A, Mohallem M, Stevens D, Rouzier R, Lerebours F, Chérel P (2014) A single-institution study of 117 pregnancy-associated breast cancers (pabc): presentation, imaging, clinicopathological data and outcome. Diagn Interv Imaging 95(4):435–441

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vashi R, Hooley R, Butler R, Geisel J, Philpotts L (2013) Breast imaging of the pregnant and lactating patient: imaging modalities and pregnancy-associated breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200(2):321–328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 46(8):1296–1316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Oh SW, Lim HS, Moon SM et al (2017) MR imaging characteristics of breast cancer diagnosed during lactation. Br J Radiol 90(1078)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Myers KS, Green LA, Lebron L, Morris EA (2017) Imaging appearance and clinical impact of preoperative breast MRI in pregnancy-associated breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 209(3):W177–W183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Taron J, Fleischer S, Preibsch H, Nikolaou K, Gruber I, Bahrs S (2018) Background parenchymal enhancement in pregnancy-associated breast cancer: a hindrance to diagnosis? Eur Radiol 29(3):1187–1193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Espinosa LA, Daniel BL, Vidarsson L, Zakhour M, Ikeda DM, Herfkens RJ (2005) The lactating breast: contrast-enhanced MR imaging of normal tissue and cancer. Radiology. 237(2):429–436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. diFlorio-Alexander RM, Slanetz PJ, Moy L et al (2018) ACR appropriateness criteria® breast imaging of pregnant and lactating women. J Am Coll Radiol 15(11S):S263–S275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Carmichael H, Matsen C, Freer P et al (2017) Breast cancer screening of pregnant and breastfeeding women with BRCA mutations. Breast Cancer Res Treat 162(2):225–230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Partridge SC, Nissan N, Rahbar H, Kitsch AE, Sigmund EE (2016) Diffusion-weighted breast MRI: clinical applications and emerging techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging 14:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  14. Partridge SC, Murthy RS, Ziadloo A, White SW, Allison KH, Lehman CD (2010) Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of the normal breast. Magn Reson Imaging 28(3):320–328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Eyal E, Shapiro-Feinberg M, Furman-Haran E et al (2012) Parametric diffusion tensor imaging of the breast. Invest Radiol 47(5):284–291

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Baltzer PA, Schäfer A, Dietzel M et al (2011) Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: a pilot study. Eur Radiol 21(1):1–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Partridge SC, Ziadloo A, Murthy R et al (2010) Diffusion tensor MRI: preliminary anisotropy measures and mapping of breast tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 31(2):339–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Le Bihan D, Mangin JF, Poupon C et al (2001) Diffusion tensor imaging: concepts and applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 13(4):534–546

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Plaza MJ, Morris EA, Thakur SB (2016) Diffusion tensor imaging in the normal breast: influences of fibroglandular tissue composition and background parenchymal enhancement. Clin Imaging 40(3):506–511

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wiederer J, Pazahr S, Leo C, Nanz D, Boss A (2013) Quantitative breast MRI: 2D histogram analysis of diffusion tensor parameters in normal tissue. MAGMA 27(2):185–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Teruel JR, Cho GY, Moccaldi Rt M et al (2017) Stimulated echo diffusion tensor imaging (STEAM-DTI) with varying diffusion times as a probe of breast tissue. J Magn Reson Imaging 45(1):84–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nissan N, Furman-Haran E, Shapiro-Feinberg M, Grobgeld D, Degani H (2014) Diffusion-tensor MR imaging of the breast: hormonal regulation. Radiology. 271(3):672–680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nissan N, Furman-Haran E, Shapiro-Feinberg M, Grobgeld D, Degani H (2017) Monitoring in-vivo the mammary gland microstructure during morphogenesis from lactation to post-weaning using diffusion tensor MRI. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 22(3):193–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cakir O, Arslan A, Inan N et al (2013) Comparison of the diagnostic performances of diffusion parameters in diffusion weighted imaging and diffusion tensor imaging of breast lesions. Eur J Radiol 82(12):e801–e806

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Teruel JR, Goa PE, Sjøbakk TE, Østlie A, Fjøsne HE, Bathen TF (2016) Diffusion weighted imaging for the differentiation of breast tumors: from apparent diffusion coefficient to high order diffusion tensor imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 43(5):1111–1121

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Onaygil C, Kaya H, Ugurlu MU, Aribal E (2017) Diagnostic performance of diffusion tensor imaging parameters in breast cancer and correlation with the prognostic factors. J Magn Reson Imaging 45(3):660–672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kosmin M, Makris A, Joshi PV, Ah-See ML, Woolf D, Padhani AR (2017) The addition of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging to body computerised tomography alters treatment decisions in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 77:109–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Furman-Haran E, Grobgeld D, Nissan N, Shapiro-Feinberg M, Degani H (2016) Can diffusion tensor anisotropy indices assist in breast cancer detection? J Magn Reson Imaging 44(6):1624–1632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tsougos I, Bakosis M, Tsivaka D et al (2019) Diagnostic performance of quantitative diffusion tensor imaging for the differentiation of breast lesions at 3 T MRI. Clin Imaging 53:25–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wilmes LJ, Li W, Shin HJ et al (2016) Diffusion tensor imaging for assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. Tomography. 2(4):438–447

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Furman-Haran E, Nissan N, Ricart-Selma V, Martinez-Rubio C, Degani H, Camps-Herrero J (2017) Quantitative evaluation of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by diffusion tensor imaging: initial results. J Magn Reson Imaging 47(4):1080–1090

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bogner W, Gruber S, Pinker K et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted MR for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 T: how does selection of diffusion protocols affect diagnosis? Radiology. 253(2):341–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Partridge SC, Singer L, Sun R et al (2011) Diffusion-weighted MRI: influence of intravoxel fat signal and breast density on breast tumor conspicuity and apparent diffusion coefficient measurements. Magn Reson Imaging 29(9):1215–1221

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Djonov V, Andres AC, Ziemiecki A (2001) Vascular remodelling during the normal and malignant life cycle of the mammary gland. Microsc Res Tech 52(2):182–189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sah RG, Agarwal K, Sharma U, Parshad R, Seenu V, Jagannathan NR (2015) Characterization of malignant breast tissue of breast cancer patients and the normal breast tissue of healthy lactating women volunteers using diffusion MRI and in vivo 1H MR spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging 41(1):169–174 36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Iima M, Kataoka M, Sakaguchi R et al (2018) Intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) and non-Gaussian diffusion MRI of the lactating breast. Eur J Radiol Open 5:24–30

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Nissan N, Furman-Haran E, Allweis T et al (2018) Noncontrast breast MRI during pregnancy using diffusion tensor imaging: a feasibility study. J Magn Reson Imaging 49(2):508–517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nissan N, Furman-Haran E, Feinberg-Shapiro M et al (2014) Tracking the mammary architectural features and detecting breast cancer with magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging. J Vis Exp (94):1–18

  39. Furman-Haran E, Eyal E, Shapiro-Feinberg M et al (2012) Advantages and drawbacks of breast DTI. Eur J Radiol 81:S45–S47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Shapiro-Feinberg M, Weisenberg N, Zehavi T et al (2012) Clinical results of DTI. Eur J Radiol 81(1):S151–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0720-048X(12)70063-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

NN thanks Prof. Hadassa Degani from the Weizmann Institute of Science for long hours of stimulating discussions, as well as for the permission to use the proprietary DTI software.

Funding

This study has received funding from The Israel Cancer Association and the Sheba Medical Center and Weizmann Institute of Science Research collaboration biomedical research grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noam Nissan.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr. Noam Nissan.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• prospective

• case-control study/experimental

• performed at one institution, but patients were recruited in several centers

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nissan, N., Allweis, T., Menes, T. et al. Breast MRI during lactation: effects on tumor conspicuity using dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) in comparison with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parametric maps. Eur Radiol 30, 767–777 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06435-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06435-x

Keywords

Navigation