Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2025
Tracking the Mammary Architectural Features and Detecting Breast Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Published on: December 15, 2014
Diagnostic Utility of an Adjusted DWI Lexicon Using Multiple b-values to Evaluate Breast Lesions in Combination with
Aika Okazawa1, Mami Iima1,2, Masako Kataoka1
1Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University.
Purpose:
We aimed to investigate the diagnostic feasibility of an adjusted diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) lexicon using multiple b values to assess breast lesions according to DWI-based breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS).
Methods:
This Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved prospective study included 127 patients with suspected breast cancer. Breast MRI was performed using a 3T scanner. Breast DW images were acquired using five b-values of 0, 200, 800, 1000, and 1500 s/mm2 (5b-value DWI) on 3T MRI. Two readers independently assessed lesion characteristics and normal breast tissue using DWI alone (5b-value DWI and 2b-value DWI with b = 0 and 800 s/mm2) according to DWI-based BI-RADS and in combination with the standard dynamic contrast-enhanced images (combined MRI). Interobserver and intermethod agreements were assessed using kappa statistics. The specificity and sensitivity of lesion classification were evaluated.
Results:
Ninety-five breast lesions (39 malignant and 56 benign) were evaluated. Interobserver agreement for lesion assessment on 5b-value DWI was very good (k ≥ 0.82) for DWI-based BI-RADS categories, lesion type, and mass characteristics; good (k = 0.75) in breast composition; and moderate (k ≥ 0.44) in background parenchymal signal (BPS) and non-mass distribution. Intermethod agreement between assessments performed using either 5b-value DWI or combined MRI was good-to-moderate (k = 0.52-0.67) for lesion type; moderate (k = 0.49-0.59) for DWI-based BI-RADS category and mass characteristics; and fair (k = 0.25-0.40) for mass shape, BPS, and breast composition. The sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPVs) for 5b-value DWI were 79.5%, 84.6% and 60.8%, 61.1% for each reader, respectively; 74.4%, 74.4% and 63.0%, 61.7% for 2b-value DWI; and 97.4%, 97.4% and 73.1%, 76.0% for combined MRI. The specificity and negative predictive values (NPVs) were 64.3%, 62.5% and 81.8%, 85.4% for 5b-value DWI; 69.6%, 67.9% and 79.6%, 79.2% for 2b-value DWI; and 75.0%, 78.6% and 97.7%, 97.8% for combined MRI.
Conclusion:
Good observer agreement was observed in the 5b-value DWI. The 5b-value DWI based on multiple b-values might have the potential to complement the 2b-value DWI; however, their diagnostic performance tended to be inferior to that of combined MRI for the characterization of breast tumors.
