Optoacoustic Imaging With Decision Support for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A 15-Reader Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND. Overlap in ultrasound features of benign and malignant breast masses yields high rates of false-positive interpretations and benign biopsy results. Optoacoustic imaging is an ultrasound-based functional imaging technique that can increase specificity. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare specificity at fixed sensitivity of ultrasound images alone and of fused ultrasound and optoacoustic images evaluated with machine learning-based decision support tool (DST) assistance. METHODS. This retrospective Reader-02 study included 480 patients (mean age, 49.9 years) with 480 breast masses (180 malignant, 300 benign) that had been classified as BI-RADS category 3-5 on the basis of conventional gray-scale ultrasound findings. The patients were selected by stratified random sampling from the earlier prospective 16-site Pioneer-01 study. For that study, masses were further evaluated by ultrasound alone followed by fused ultrasound and optoacoustic imaging between December 2012 and September 2015. For the current study, 15 readers independently reviewed the previously acquired images after training in optoacoustic imaging interpretation. Readers first assigned probability of malignancy (POM) on the basis of clinical history, mammographic findings, and conventional ultrasound findings. Readers then evaluated fused ultrasound and optoacoustic images, assigned scores for ultrasound and optoacoustic imaging features, and viewed a POM prediction score derived by a machine learning-based DST before issuing final POM. Individual and mean specificities at fixed sensitivity of 98% and partial AUC (pAUC) (95-100% sensitivity) were calculated. RESULTS. Averaged across all readers, specificity at fixed sensitivity of 98% was significantly higher for fused ultrasound and optoacoustic imaging with DST assistance than for ultrasound alone (47.2% vs 38.2%; p = .03). Across all readers, pAUC was higher (p < .001) for fused ultrasound and optoacoustic imaging with DST assistance (0.024 [95% CI, 0.023-0.026]) than for ultrasound alone (0.021 [95% CI, 0.019-0.022]). Better performance using fused ultrasound and optoacoustic imaging with DST assistance than using ultrasound alone was observed for 14 of 15 readers for specificity at fixed sensitivity and for 15 of 15 readers for pAUC. CONCLUSION. Fused ultrasound and optoacoustic imaging with DST assistance had significantly higher specificity at fixed sensitivity than did conventional ultrasound alone. CLINICAL IMPACT. Optoacoustic imaging, integrated with reader training and DST assistance, may help reduce the frequency of biopsy of benign breast masses.

Optoacoustic Imaging and Gray-Scale US Features of Breast Cancers: Correlation with Molecular Subtypes.

Background Optoacoustic imaging can assess tumor hypoxia coregistered with US gray-scale images. The combination of optoacoustic imaging and US may have a role in distinguishing breast cancer molecular subtypes. Purpose To investigate whether optoacoustic US feature scores correlate with breast cancer molecular subtypes. Materials and Methods A total of 1972 women (with a total of 2055 breast masses) underwent prebiopsy optoacoustic US in a prospective multi-institutional study between December 2012 and September 2015. Seven readers blinded to pathologic diagnosis scored gray-scale US and optoacoustic US features of the known cancers. Optoacoustic US features within (internal) and outside of the tumor boundary (external) were scored. Immunohistochemistry findings were obtained from pathology reports. Multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to fit the US scores, adding optoacoustic US features to the model to investigate the incremental benefit of each feature. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to analyze the relationship between molecular subtypes and feature scores. Results Among 653 invasive cancers identified in 629 women, a total of 532 cancers in 519 women, all of which had molecular markers available, were included in the analysis. Mean age ± standard deviation was 57.9 years ± 12.6. Mean total external optoacoustic US feature scores of luminal (A and B) breast cancers were higher (9.9 vs 8.8; P < .05) and total internal scores were lower (6.8 vs 7.7; P < .001) than those of triple-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2+) cancers. A multinomial logistic regression model showed that optoacoustic internal vessel (odds ratio [OR], 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.5, 0.8; P = .002), optoacoustic internal blush (OR, 0.7; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.9; P = .02), and optoacoustic internal hemoglobin (OR, 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8; P = .001) were associated with classification of luminal versus triple-negative and HER2+ cancer subtypes. Conclusion Combined optoacoustic US imaging and gray-scale US features may help distinguish luminal breast cancers from triple-negative and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive cancers. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Mann in this issue.

Optoacoustic Breast Imaging: Imaging-Pathology Correlation of Optoacoustic Features in Benign and Malignant Breast Masses.

OBJECTIVE: Optoacoustic ultrasound breast imaging is a fused anatomic and functional modality that shows morphologic features, as well as hemoglobin amount and relative oxygenation within and around breast masses. The purpose of this study is to investigate the positive predictive value (PPV) of optoacoustic ultrasound features in benign and malignant masses. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In this study, 92 masses assessed as BI-RADS category 3, 4, or 5 in 94 subjects were imaged with optoacoustic ultrasound. Each mass was scored by seven blinded independent readers according to three internal features in the tumor interior and two external features in its boundary zone and periphery. Mean and median optoacoustic ultrasound scores were compared with histologic findings for biopsied masses and nonbiopsied BI-RADS category 3 masses, which were considered benign if they were stable at 12-month follow-up. Statistical significance was analyzed using a two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum test with a 0.05 significance level. RESULTS: Mean and median optoacoustic ultrasound scores for all individual internal and external features, as well as summed scores, were higher for malignant masses than for benign masses (p < 0.0001). High external scores, indicating increased hemoglobin and deoxygenation and abnormal vessel morphologic features in the tumor boundary zone and periphery, better distinguished benign from malignant masses than did high internal scores reflecting increased hemoglobin and deoxygenation within the tumor interior. CONCLUSION: High optoacoustic ultrasound scores, particularly those based on external features in the boundary zone and periphery of breast masses, have high PPVs for malignancy and, conversely, low optoacoustic ultrasound scores have low PPV for malignancy. The functional component of optoacoustic ultrasound may help to overcome some of the limitations of morphologic overlap in the distinction of benign and malignant masses.

Downgrading and Upgrading Gray-Scale Ultrasound BI-RADS Categories of Benign and Malignant Masses With Optoacoustics: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: False-positive findings remain challenging in breast imaging. This study investigates the incremental value of optoacoustic imaging in improving BI-RADS categorization of breast masses at ultrasound. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study device is an optoacoustic breast imaging device with a handheld duplex laser and internal gray-scale ultrasound probe, fusing functional and morphologic information (optoacoustic ultrasound). In this prospective multisite study, breast masses assessed as BI-RADS category 3, 4A, 4B, 4C, or 5 by site radiologists underwent both gray-scale ultrasound and optoacoustic imaging with the study device. Independent reader radiologists assessed internal gray-scale ultrasound and optoacoustic ultrasound features for each mass and assigned a BI-RADS category. The percentage of mass reads for which optoacoustic ultrasound resulted in a downgrade or upgrade of BI-RADS category relative to internal gray-scale ultrasound was determined. RESULTS: Of 94 total masses, 39 were biopsy-proven malignant, 44 were biopsy-proven benign, and 11 BI-RADS category 3 masses were stable at 12-month follow-up. The sensitivity of both optoacoustic ultrasound and internal gray-scale ultrasound was 97.1%. The specificity was 44.3% for optoacoustic ultrasound and 36.4% for internal gray-scale ultrasound. Using optoacoustic ultrasound, 41.7% of benign masses or BI-RADS category 3 masses that were stable at 12-month follow-up were downgraded to BI-RADS category 2 by independent readers; 36.6% of masses assigned BI-RADS category 4A were downgraded to BI-RADS category 3 or 2, and 10.1% assigned BI-RADS category 4B were downgraded to BI-RADS category 3 or 2. Using optoacoustic ultrasound, independent readers upgraded 75.0% of the malignant masses classified as category 4A, 4B, 4C, or 5, and 49.4% of the malignant masses were classified as category 4B, 4C, or 5. CONCLUSION: Optoacoustic ultrasound resulted in BI-RADS category downgrading of benign masses and upgrading of malignant masses compared with gray-scale ultrasound.

A Pivotal Study of Optoacoustic Imaging to Diagnose Benign and Malignant Breast Masses: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists.

Purpose To compare the diagnostic utility of an investigational optoacoustic imaging device that fuses laser optical imaging (OA) with grayscale ultrasonography (US) to grayscale US alone in differentiating benign and malignant breast masses. Materials and Methods This prospective, 16-site study of 2105 women (study period: 12/21/2012 to 9/9/2015) compared Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories assigned by seven blinded independent readers to benign and malignant breast masses using OA/US versus US alone. BI-RADS 3, 4, or 5 masses assessed at diagnostic US with biopsy-proven histologic findings and BI-RADS 3 masses stable at 12 months were eligible. Independent readers reviewed US images obtained with the OA/US device, assigned a probability of malignancy (POM) and BI-RADS category, and locked results. The same independent readers then reviewed OA/US images, scored OA features, and assigned OA/US POM and a BI-RADS category. Specificity and sensitivity were calculated for US and OA/US. Benign and malignant mass upgrade and downgrade rates, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were compared. Results Of 2105 consented subjects with 2191 masses, 100 subjects (103 masses) were analyzed separately as a training population and excluded. An additional 202 subjects (210 masses) were excluded due to technical failures or incomplete imaging, 72 subjects (78 masses) due to protocol deviations, and 41 subjects (43 masses) due to high-risk histologic results. Of 1690 subjects with 1757 masses (1079 [61.4%] benign and 678 [38.6%] malignant masses), OA/US downgraded 40.8% (3078/7535) of benign mass reads, with a specificity of 43.0% (3242/7538, 99% confidence interval [CI]: 40.4%, 45.7%) for OA/US versus 28.1% (2120/7543, 99% CI: 25.8%, 30.5%) for the internal US of the OA/US device. OA/US exceeded US in specificity by 14.9% (P < .0001; 99% CI: 12.9, 16.9%). Sensitivity for biopsied malignant masses was 96.0% (4553/4745, 99% CI: 94.5%, 97.0%) for OA/US and 98.6% (4680/4746, 99% CI: 97.8%, 99.1%) for US (P < .0001). The negative likelihood ratio of 0.094 for OA/US indicates a negative examination can reduce a maximum US-assigned pretest probability of 17.8% (low BI-RADS 4B) to a posttest probability of 2% (BI-RADS 3). Conclusion OA/US increases the specificity of breast mass assessment compared with the device internal grayscale US alone. Online supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2017.

Contouring Guidelines for the Axillary Lymph Nodes for the Delivery of Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer: Evaluation of the RTOG Breast Cancer Atlas.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify the axillary lymph nodes on pretreatment diagnostic computed tomography (CT) of the chest to determine their position relative to the anatomic axillary borders as defined by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) breast cancer atlas for radiation therapy planning. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Pretreatment diagnostic CT chest scans available for 30 breast cancer patients with clinically involved lymph nodes were fused with simulation CT. Contouring of axillary levels I, II, and III according to the RTOG guidelines was performed. Measurements were made from the area of distal tumor to the anatomic borders in 6 dimensions for each level. RESULTS: Of the 30 patients, 100%, 93%, and 37% had clinical involvement of levels I, II, and III, respectively. The mean number of lymph nodes dissected was 13.6. The mean size of the largest lymph node was 2.4 cm. Extracapsular extension was seen in 23% of patients. In 97% of patients, an aspect of the involved lymph node lay outside of the anatomic border of a level. In 80% and 83% of patients, tumor extension was seen outside the cranial (1.78 ± 1.0 cm; range, 0.28-3.58 cm) and anterior (1.27 ± 0.92 cm; range, 0.24-3.58 cm) borders of level I, respectively. In 80% of patients, tumor extension was seen outside the caudal border of level II (1.36 ± 1.0 cm, range, 0.27-3.86 cm), and 0% to 33% of patients had tumor extension outside the remaining borders of all levels. CONCLUSIONS: To cover 95% of lymph nodes at the cranial and anterior borders of level I, an additional clinical target volume margin of 3.78 cm and 3.11 cm, respectively, is necessary. The RTOG guidelines may be insufficient for coverage of axillary disease in patients with clinical nodal involvement who are undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy, incomplete axillary dissection, or treatment with intensity modulated radiation therapy. In patients with pretreatment diagnostic CT chest scans, fusion with simulation CT should be considered for tumor delineation.

Non-mass-associated intraductal papillomas: is excision necessary?

Intraductal papillomas (IDPs) of the breast can be associated with a variety of clinical symptoms and radiologic findings. Surgical excision is often recommended based on the possibility of an associated high-grade lesion. Although the rate of upgrades has been extensively evaluated for IDPs, many studies are hindered by broad inclusion criteria, a lack of pathologic-radiologic concordance, and no standard definition of what constitutes an upgrade. In the current study, we evaluate the risk of upgrade for a specific subset of IDPs: non-mass-associated IDPs. We identified all breast needle core biopsies with a diagnosis of IDP between 2003 and 2010. Patients with associated masses, architectural distortion, or ipsilateral breast cancer were excluded. All needle core biopsy slides and relevant imaging studies were reviewed to ensure pathologic-radiologic concordance. Excision pathology was also reviewed; an upgrade was defined as the presence of ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive carcinoma in the excision. Seventy-nine IDPs that met inclusion criteria were identified and were further divided into 3 histologic categories: micropapilloma, fragmented IDP, and atypical IDP. Micropapillomas and fragmented IDPs had no upgrades (0/37). In patients who did not undergo excision, none subsequently developed ipsilateral breast cancer (follow-up, 50-61 months). This is in contrast to atypical IDPs that had a 33% upgrade rate. One patient with an unexcised atypical IDP developed ipsilateral breast cancer within 2 years. Our data suggest that conservative follow-up is reasonable for non-mass-associated IDPs without atypia regardless of microscopic size, provided that careful pathologic-radiologic correlation is achieved.