Related Experiment Video For Breast cancer
Updated: Sep 10, 2026
Tracking the Mammary Architectural Features and Detecting Breast Cancer with Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Published on: December 15, 2014
Contrast-Enhanced Cone-Beam Breast CT Features for Differentiation of Breast Lesions with a Ductal Carcinoma In Situ
Wenxiu Guo1, Yue Ma1, Lu Yin1
1Department of Radiology, Medical Artificial General Intelligence for Computation (MAGIC) Lab, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China (W.G., Y.M., L.Y., Y.W., A.L., Y.Z., J.W., Z.Y.); Tianjin's Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, China (W.G., Y.M., L.Y., Y.W., A.L., Y.Z., J.W., Z.Y.); Key Laboratory of Breast Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin Medical University, Ministry of Education, Tianjin, China (W.G., Y.M., L.Y., Y.W., A.L., Y.Z., J.W., Z.Y.); Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, China (W.G., Y.M., L.Y., Y.W., A.L., Y.Z., J.W., Z.Y.); State Key Laboratory of Druggability Evaluation and Systematic Translational Medicine, Tianjin, China (W.G., Y.M., L.Y., Y.W., A.L., Y.Z., J.W., Z.Y.).
Rationale And Objective:
Preoperative differentiation among ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM), and DCIS with invasive ductal carcinoma (DCIS-IDC) remains challenging. We explored clinicopathological and contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT) features associated with invasive status and developed exploratory stepwise models.
Materials And Methods:
Patients with DCIS, DCISM, or DCIS-IDC undergoing preoperative CE-CBBCT from August 2018 to January 2026 were retrospectively included in the training cohort, whereas patients meeting the same inclusion criteria at the same institution from February 2026 to June 2026 comprised a temporally separated validation cohort. Clinicopathological and CE-CBBCT features were compared among groups. Logistic regression models were developed to distinguish DCIS from invasive lesions and DCISM from DCIS-IDC using CE-CBBCT features.
Results:
164 women were included in the training cohort and 58 in the validation cohort. In the training cohort, sentinel lymph node metastasis, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, Ki-67 expression, and nuclear grade differed among groups (all P < 0.05). DCIS and DCISM differed in the maximum extent perpendicular to the ductal orientation (P = 0.014) and adjacent vessel sign (P = 0.005), whereas DCISM and DCIS-IDC differed in the degree of lesion enhancement and lesion type (both P < 0.001). The two models achieved areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.815 and 0.810 in the training cohort and 0.785 and 0.817, respectively, in the temporally separated validation cohort.
Conclusion:
CE-CBBCT features varied with invasive status, and the exploratory models showed preliminary discriminatory value. However, prospective multicenter external validation is needed before clinical implementation.
