Objectives To compare the consistency of contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT), MRI and mammography regarding characterization of breast cancer. Methods In this retrospective study, patients with breast cancer who underwent preoperative CE-CBBCT, MRI, and mammography between January 2017 and July 2022 were enrolled. Three experienced radiologists independently interpreted the characteristics of breast lesions on each imaging mode referring to BI-RADS, with a 4-week wash-out period. One of the three radiologists reviewed the CE-CBBCT images 4 weeks after the initial evaluation. Cross-modality consistency was calculated by Cohen’s Kappa based on majority report. Inter-and intra-reader agreement were assessed using Fleiss and Cohen’s Kappa, respectively. The association between imaging factors and consistency levels was analyzed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U test. Results A total of 214 malignant lesions identified in 207 patients were enrolled. CE-CBBCT showed almost perfect agreement with MRI on lesion type identification (Kappa = 0.865, 95% CI: 0.802–0.928), but fair agreement with mammography (Kappa = 0.287, 95% CI: 0.205–0.369). CE-CBBCT showed substantial agreement on characterization with MRI for both mass (Kappa = 0.752–0.824) and non-mass enhancement (NME) (Kappa = 0.702–0.729), and non-contrast-enhanced CBBCT (NCE-CBBCT) showed substantial agreement with mammography for calcification (Kappa = 0.717–0.777). Inter- (Kappa = 0.611–0.738) and intra-reader (Kappa = 0.757–0.887) agreement were substantial on CE-CBBCT interpretation. There was no statistically significant difference in imaging factors between different consistency levels (all p > 0.05). Conclusions CE-CBBCT showed high consistency on mass and NME characterization with MRI, and on calcification with mammography, indicating that CE-CBBCT could combine morphology, hemodynamic and calcification features, and the corresponding descriptors have the feasibility to describe CE-CBBCT characteristics of breast cancer. Key Points <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Question</Emphasis> Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT) is widely used in the diagnosis and assessment of breast cancer, but there is no standardized lexicon for image interpretation. <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Findings</Emphasis> CE-CBBCT showed high consistency and comparable reproducibility with MRI and mammography for characterizing breast cancer lesions. <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Clinical relevance</Emphasis> The findings prove that CE-CBBCT could combine morphology, hemodynamic, and calcification features and provide support for the feasibility of applying the BI-RADS descriptors of MRI and mammography to interpret contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT images in clinic. Graphical Abstract

Comparison of contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT, MRI, and mammography for breast cancer characterization

期刊论文
发表日期：

2025年4月16日

查看全文

Yue Ma,
Yafei Wang,
Yuwei Zhang,
Keyi Bian,
Yueqiang Zhu,
Aidi Liu,
Haijie Li,
Lu Yin,
Hong Lu,
Zhaoxiang Ye

摘要

Objectives

To compare the consistency of contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT), MRI and mammography regarding characterization of breast cancer.

Methods

In this retrospective study, patients with breast cancer who underwent preoperative CE-CBBCT, MRI, and mammography between January 2017 and July 2022 were enrolled. Three experienced radiologists independently interpreted the characteristics of breast lesions on each imaging mode referring to BI-RADS, with a 4-week wash-out period. One of the three radiologists reviewed the CE-CBBCT images 4 weeks after the initial evaluation. Cross-modality consistency was calculated by Cohen’s Kappa based on majority report. Inter-and intra-reader agreement were assessed using Fleiss and Cohen’s Kappa, respectively. The association between imaging factors and consistency levels was analyzed using chi-square and Mann-Whitney U test.

Results

A total of 214 malignant lesions identified in 207 patients were enrolled. CE-CBBCT showed almost perfect agreement with MRI on lesion type identification (Kappa = 0.865, 95% CI: 0.802–0.928), but fair agreement with mammography (Kappa = 0.287, 95% CI: 0.205–0.369). CE-CBBCT showed substantial agreement on characterization with MRI for both mass (Kappa = 0.752–0.824) and non-mass enhancement (NME) (Kappa = 0.702–0.729), and non-contrast-enhanced CBBCT (NCE-CBBCT) showed substantial agreement with mammography for calcification (Kappa = 0.717–0.777). Inter- (Kappa = 0.611–0.738) and intra-reader (Kappa = 0.757–0.887) agreement were substantial on CE-CBBCT interpretation. There was no statistically significant difference in imaging factors between different consistency levels (all p > 0.05).

Conclusions

CE-CBBCT showed high consistency on mass and NME characterization with MRI, and on calcification with mammography, indicating that CE-CBBCT could combine morphology, hemodynamic and calcification features, and the corresponding descriptors have the feasibility to describe CE-CBBCT characteristics of breast cancer.

Key Points

Question Contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT (CE-CBBCT) is widely used in the diagnosis and assessment of breast cancer, but there is no standardized lexicon for image interpretation.

Findings CE-CBBCT showed high consistency and comparable reproducibility with MRI and mammography for characterizing breast cancer lesions.

Clinical relevance The findings prove that CE-CBBCT could combine morphology, hemodynamic, and calcification features and provide support for the feasibility of applying the BI-RADS descriptors of MRI and mammography to interpret contrast-enhanced cone-beam breast CT images in clinic.

Graphical Abstract