Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
BioMed Research International
Volume 2017 (2017), Article ID 4845909, 6 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4845909
Research Article

MRI Texture Analysis of Background Parenchymal Enhancement of the Breast

1Department of Radiology, Nihon University Hospital, 1-6 Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8309, Japan
2Department of Radiology, Juntendo Nerima Hospital, 3-1-10 Nerima-ku, Tokyo 177-8521, Japan
3Division of Radiological Technology, Nihon University Hospital, 1-6 Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8309, Japan
4Department of Breast Surgery, Nihon University Hospital, 1-6 Kanda-Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8309, Japan

Correspondence should be addressed to Yasuo Amano

Received 17 April 2017; Revised 27 May 2017; Accepted 13 June 2017; Published 24 July 2017

Academic Editor: Marco Moschetta

Copyright © 2017 Yasuo Amano et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. C. K. Kuhl, H. B. Bieling, J. Gieseke et al., “Healthy premenopausal breast parenchyma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: Normal contrast medium enhancement and cyclical-phase dependency,” Radiology, vol. 203, no. 1, pp. 137–144, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. E. A. Morris, C. Comstock, C. D. Lehman et al., B. Back Ground Parenchymal Enhancement (BPE), ACR BI-RADS® Magnetic Resonance Imaging, ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, 5th edition, 2013.
  3. C. S. Giess, E. D. Yeh, S. Raza, and R. L. Birdwell, “Background parenchymal enhancement at breast MR imaging: Normal patterns, diagnostic challenges, and potential for false-positive and false-negative interpretation,” Radiographics, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 234–247, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. S. Y. Park, D. K. Kang, and T. H. Kim, “Does background parenchymal enhancement on MRI affect the rate of positive resectionmargin in breast cancer patients?” British Journal of Radiology, vol. 88, no. 1046, Article ID 20140638, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. V. King, J. D. Brooks, J. L. Bernstein, A. S. Reiner, M. C. Pike, and E. A. Morris, “Background parenchymal enhancement at breast MR imaging and breast cancer risk,” Radiology, vol. 260, no. 1, pp. 50–60, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. M. Telegrafo, L. Rella, A. A. Stabile Ianora, G. Angelelli, and M. Moschetta, “Breast MRI background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) correlates with the risk of breast cancer,” Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 173–176, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. B. Bennani-Baiti, M. Dietzel, and P. A. Baltzer, “MRI background parenchymal enhancement is not associated with breast cancer,” PLoS ONE, vol. 11, no. 7, Article ID e0158573, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. A. Melsaether, M. McDermott, D. Gupta, K. Pysarenko, S. D. Shaylor, and L. Moy, “Inter- And intrareader agreement for categorization of background parenchymal enhancement at baseline and after training,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 203, no. 1, pp. 209–215, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. A. Tagliafico, B. Bignotti, G. Tagliafico, S. Tosto, A. Signori, and M. Calabrese, “Quantitative evaluation of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on breast MRI. A feasibility study with a semi-automatic and automatic software compared to observer-based scores,” British Journal of Radiology, vol. 88, no. 1056, Article ID 20150417, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. G. Castellano, L. Bonilha, L. M. Li, and F. Cendes, “Texture analysis of medical images,” Clinical Radiology, vol. 59, no. 12, pp. 1061–1069, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. A. Materka, “Texture analysis methodologies for magnetic resonance imaging,” Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 243–250, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. P. M. Szczypiński, M. Strzelecki, A. Materka, and A. Klepaczko, “MaZda—a software package for image texture analysis,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 66–76, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. W. Chen, M. L. Giger, H. Li, U. Bick, and G. M. Newstead, “Volumetric texture analysis of breast lesions on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance images,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 562–571, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. S. A. Waugh, C. A. Purdie, L. B. Jordan et al., “Magnetic resonance imaging texture analysis classification of primary breast cancer,” European Radiology, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 322–330, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. E. Mayerhoefer, G. H. Welsch, G. Riegler et al., “Feasibility of texture analysis for the assessment of biochemical changes in meniscal tissue on t1 maps calculated from delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage data: Comparison with conventional relaxation time measurements,” Investigative Radiology, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 543–547, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. J. Liu, Y. Mao, Z. Li et al., “Use of texture analysis based on contrast-enhanced MRI to predict treatment response to chemoradiotherapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 445–455, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. R. Rozenberg, R. E. Thornhill, T. A. Flood, S. W. Hakim, C. Lim, and N. Schieda, “Whole-tumor quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient histogram and texture analysis to predict Gleason score upgrading in intermediate-risk 3 + 4 = 7 prostate cancer,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 206, no. 4, pp. 775–782, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. R. K. Verma, J. Slotboom, C. Locher et al., “Characterization of Enhancing MS Lesions by Dynamic Texture Parameter Analysis of Dynamic Susceptibility Perfusion Imaging,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2016, Article ID 9578139, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. M. G. Lubner, N. Stabo, E. J. Abel, A. Munoz Del Rio, and P. J. Pickhardt, “CT textural analysis of large primary renal cell carcinomas: Pretreatment tumor heterogeneity correlates with histologic findings and clinical outcomes,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 207, no. 1, pp. 96–105, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. J. Parikh, M. Selmi, G. Charles-Edwards et al., “Changes in primary breast cancer heterogeneity may augment midtreatment MR imaging assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy,” Radiology, vol. 272, no. 1, pp. 100–112, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. J. Kim, E. S. Ko, Y. Lim et al., “Breast cancer heterogeneity: MR imaging texture analysis and survival outcomes,” Radiology, vol. 282, no. 3, pp. 665–675, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  22. A. Tagliafico, B. Bignotti, G. Tagliafico et al., “Breast density assessment using a 3T MRI system: Comparison among different sequences,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 6, Article ID e99027, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus