Assessment of Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Background Parenchymal Enhancement Parameters to Improve Determination of Individual Breast Cancer Risk

Computerized assessment of background parenchymal enhancement on breast dynamic contrast-enhanced-MRI including electronic lesion removal

Purpose

Current clinical assessment qualitatively describes background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) as minimal, mild, moderate, or marked based on the visually perceived volume and intensity of enhancement in normal fibroglandular breast tissue in dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI. Tumor enhancement may be included within the visual assessment of BPE, thus inflating BPE estimation due to angiogenesis within the tumor. Using a dataset of 426 MRIs, we developed an automated method to segment breasts, electronically remove lesions, and calculate scores to estimate BPE levels.

Approach

A U-Net was trained for breast segmentation from DCE-MRI maximum intensity projection (MIP) images. Fuzzy c -means clustering was used to segment lesions; the lesion volume was removed prior to creating projections. U-Net outputs were applied to create projection images of both, affected, and unaffected breasts before and after lesion removal. BPE scores were calculated from various projection images, including MIPs or average intensity projections of first- or second postcontrast subtraction MRIs, to evaluate the effect of varying image parameters on automatic BPE assessment. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to determine the predictive value of computed scores in BPE level classification tasks relative to radiologist ratings.

Results

Statistically significant trends were found between radiologist BPE ratings and calculated BPE scores for all breast regions (Kendall correlation, p < 0.001 ). Scores from all breast regions performed significantly better than guessing (p < 0.025 from the z -test). Results failed to show a statistically significant difference in performance with and without lesion removal. BPE scores of the affected breast in the second postcontrast subtraction MIP after lesion removal performed statistically greater than random guessing across various viewing projections and DCE time points.

Conclusions

Results demonstrate the potential for automatic BPE scoring to serve as a quantitative value for objective BPE level classification from breast DCE-MR without the influence of lesion enhancement.

A background parenchymal enhancement quantification framework of breast magnetic resonance imaging

Background

Background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) is defined as the enhanced proportion of normal fibroglandular tissue on enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. BPE shows promise as a quantitative imaging biomarker (QIB). However, the lack of consensus among radiologists in their semi-quantitative grading of BPE limits its clinical utility.

Methods

The main objective of this study was to develop a BPE quantification model according to clinical expertise, with the BPE integral being used as a QIB to incorporate both the volume and intensity of the enhancement metrics. The model was applied to 2,786 cases to compare our quantitative results with radiologists' semi-quantitative BPE grading to evaluate the effectiveness of using the BPE integral as a QIB for analyzing BPE. Comparisons between multiple groups of nonnormally distributed BPE integrals were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test.

Results

Our study found a considerable degree of concordance between our BPE quantitative integral and radiologists' semi-quantitative assessments. Specifically, our research results revealed significant variability in BPE integral attained through the BPE quantification framework among all semi-quantitative BPE grading groups labeled by experienced radiologists, including mild-moderate (P<0.001), mild-marked (P<0.001), and moderate-marked (P<0.001). Furthermore, there was an apparent correlation between BPE integral and BPE grades, with marked BPE displaying the highest BPE integral, followed by moderate BPE, with mild BPE exhibiting the lowest BPE integral value.

Conclusions

The study developed and implemented a BPE quantification framework, which incorporated both the volume and intensity of enhancement and which could serve as a QIB for BPE.

Combining Molecular and Radiomic Features for Risk Assessment in Breast Cancer

Breast cancer risk is highly variable within the population and current research is leading the shift toward personalized medicine. By accurately assessing an individual woman's risk, we can reduce the risk of over/undertreatment by preventing unnecessary procedures or by elevating screening procedures. Breast density measured from conventional mammography has been established as one of the most dominant risk factors for breast cancer; however, it is currently limited by its ability to characterize more complex breast parenchymal patterns that have been shown to provide additional information to strengthen cancer risk models. Molecular factors ranging from high penetrance, or high likelihood that a mutation will show signs and symptoms of the disease, to combinations of gene mutations with low penetrance have shown promise for augmenting risk assessment. Although imaging biomarkers and molecular biomarkers have both individually demonstrated improved performance in risk assessment, few studies have evaluated them together. This review aims to highlight the current state of the art in breast cancer risk assessment using imaging and genetic biomarkers.

Correlation of background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI with breast cancer

AIM

To evaluate the prognostic value of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) in breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in women referred to radiological department as a high risk for breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, cross-sectional study included 327 consecutive patients (mean age: 60 years, age range: 30-90 years) who underwent breast MRI and tissue biopsy between 2007 and 2016. All MRI images (T1, T2, and subtraction images) were evaluated visually. The relationship of BPE with patient age, fibroglandular tissue (FGT), Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) categories, presence of breast cancer, and expression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), progesterone receptor (PR), oestrogen receptor (ER), and Ki67 were analysed. Furthermore, all variables were correlated with pre- and postmenopausal status.

RESULTS

BPE of bilateral breast showed a weak correlation with FGT (right BPE: r=-0.14, p=0.004; left BPE: r=0.16, p=0.003), a weak negative correlation with patient age (right BPE: r=-0.14, p=0.007; left BPE: r=-0.15, p=0.006), and significant correlation with HER2 (right BPE, p=0.02), left BPE with HER2 was not significant. Among the correlations between BPE and BIRADS, only between right BPE and right BIRADS was significant (p=0.031). No clear evidence of an association between breast MRI BPE and breast cancer in premenopausal and postmenopausal status was observed, and no difference was found between the right and left breasts.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study showed no significant correlations between BPE and breast cancer. In addition, there was no significant difference between the right and left breast. Hence, BPE of MRI may not be a reliable biomarker of breast cancer development.

Beyond Breast Density: Risk Measures for Breast Cancer in Multiple Imaging Modalities

Breast density is an independent risk factor for breast cancer. In digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis, breast density is assessed visually using the four-category scale developed by the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (5th edition as of November 2022). Epidemiologically based risk models, such as the Tyrer-Cuzick model (version 8), demonstrate superior modeling performance when mammographic density is incorporated. Beyond just density, a separate mammographic measure of breast cancer risk is parenchymal textural complexity. With advancements in radiomics and deep learning, mammographic textural patterns can be assessed quantitatively and incorporated into risk models. Other supplemental screening modalities, such as breast US and MRI, offer independent risk measures complementary to those derived from mammography. Breast US allows the two components of fibroglandular tissue (stromal and glandular) to be visualized separately in a manner that is not possible with mammography. A higher glandular component at screening breast US is associated with higher risk. With MRI, a higher background parenchymal enhancement of the fibroglandular tissue has also emerged as an imaging marker for risk assessment. Imaging markers observed at mammography, US, and MRI are powerful tools in refining breast cancer risk prediction, beyond mammographic density alone.

Post-Processing Bias Field Inhomogeneity Correction for Assessing Background Parenchymal Enhancement on Breast MRI as a Quantitative Marker of Treatment Response

Background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) of breast fibroglandular tissue (FGT) in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown an association with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with breast cancer. Fully automated segmentation of FGT for BPE calculation is a challenge when image artifacts are present. Low spatial frequency intensity nonuniformity due to coil sensitivity variations is known as bias or inhomogeneity and can affect FGT segmentation and subsequent BPE measurement. In this study, we utilized the N4ITK algorithm for bias correction over a restricted bilateral breast volume and compared the contralateral FGT segmentations based on uncorrected and bias-corrected images in three MRI examinations at pre-treatment, early treatment and inter-regimen timepoints during NAC. A retrospective analysis of 2 cohorts was performed: one with 735 patients enrolled in the multi-center I-SPY 2 TRIAL and the sub-cohort of 340 patients meeting a high-quality benchmark for segmentation. Bias correction substantially increased the FGT segmentation quality for 6.3–8.0% of examinations, while it substantially decreased the quality for no examination. Our results showed improvement in segmentation quality and a small but statistically significant increase in the resulting BPE measurement after bias correction at all timepoints in both cohorts. Continuing studies are examining the effects on pCR prediction.

Screening Breast MRI and the Science of Premenopausal Background Parenchymal Enhancement

The significance of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on screening and diagnostic breast MRI continues to be elucidated. Background parenchymal enhancement was initially deemed probably benign and followed or thought of as an artifact degrading the accuracy of breast cancer detection on breast MRI examinations. Subsequent research has focused on understanding the role of BPE regarding screening breast MRI. Today, there is growing evidence that a myriad of factors affect BPE, which in turn may influence patient outcomes. Additionally, BPE could represent an important risk factor for the future development of breast cancer. This article aims to describe the most up-to-date research on BPE as it relates to screening breast MRI in premenopausal women.

Quantitative Measures of Background Parenchymal Enhancement Predict Breast Cancer Risk

BACKGROUND. Higher categories of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) increase breast cancer risk. However, current clinical BPE categorization is subjective. OBJECTIVE. Using a semiautomated segmentation algorithm, we calculated quantitative BPE measures and investigated the utility of individual features and feature pairs in significantly predicting subsequent breast cancer risk compared with radiologist-assigned BPE category. METHODS. In this retrospective case-control study, we identified 95 women at high risk of breast cancer but without a personal history of breast cancer who underwent breast MRI. Of these women, 19 subsequently developed breast cancer and were included as cases. Each case was age matched to four control patients (76 control patients total). Sociodemographic characteristics were compared between the cases and matched control patients using the Mann-Whitney U test. From each dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI examination, quantitative fibroglandular tissue and BPE measures were computed by averaging enhancing voxels above enhancement ratio thresholds (0-100%), totaling the enhancing volume above thresholds (BPE volume in cm³), and estimating the percentage of enhancing tissue above thresholds relative to total breast volume (BPE%) on each gadolinium-enhanced phase. For the 91 imaging features generated, we compared predictive performance using conditional logistic regression with 80:20 hold-out cross validation and ROC curve analysis. ROC AUC was the figure of merit. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were also computed. All feature pairs were exhaustively searched to identify those with the highest AUC and Youden index. A DeLong test was used to compare predictive performance (AUCs). RESULTS. Women subsequently diagnosed with breast cancer were more likely to have mild, moderate, or marked BPE (odds ratio, 3.0; 95% CI, 0.9-10.0; p = .07). According to ROC curve analysis, a BPE category threshold greater than minimal resulted in a maximized AUC (0.62) in distinguishing cases from control patients. Compared with BPE category, the first gadolinium-enhanced (phase 1) BPE% at the 30% and 40% enhancement ratio thresholds yielded significantly higher AUC values of 0.85 (p = .0007) and 0.84 (p = .0004), respectively. Feature combinations showed similar AUC values with improved sensitivity. CONCLUSION. Preliminary data indicate that quantitative BPE measures may outperform radiologist-assigned category in breast cancer risk prediction. CLINICAL IMPACT. Future risk prediction models that incorporate quantitative measures warrant additional investigation.

Response Predictivity to Neoadjuvant Therapies in Breast Cancer: A Qualitative Analysis of Background Parenchymal Enhancement in DCE-MRI

Background: For assessing the predictability of oncology neoadjuvant therapy results, the background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) parameter in breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has acquired increased interest. This work aims to qualitatively evaluate the BPE parameter as a potential predictive marker for neoadjuvant therapy. Method: Three radiologists examined, in triple-blind modality, the MRIs of 80 patients performed before the start of chemotherapy, after three months from the start of treatment, and after surgery. They identified the portion of fibroglandular tissue (FGT) and BPE of the contralateral breast to the tumor in the basal control pre-treatment (baseline). Results: We observed a reduction of BPE classes in serial MRI checks performed during neoadjuvant therapy, as compared to baseline pre-treatment conditions, in 61.3% of patients in the intermediate step, and in 86.7% of patients in the final step. BPE reduction was significantly associated with sequential anthracyclines/taxane administration in the first cycle of neoadjuvant therapy compared to anti-HER2 containing therapies. The therapy response was also significantly related to tumor size. There were no associations with menopausal status, fibroglandular tissue (FGT) amount, age, BPE baseline, BPE in intermediate, and in the final MRI step. Conclusions: The measured variability of this parameter during therapy could predict therapy effectiveness in early stages, improving decision-making in the perspective of personalized medicine. Our preliminary results suggest that BPE may represent a predictive factor in response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer, warranting future investigations in conjunction with radiomics.

Breast density, MR imaging biomarkers, and breast cancer risk

Mammographic breast density and various breast MRI features are imaging biomarkers that can predict a woman's future risk of breast cancer. While mammographic density (MD) has been established as an independent risk factor for the development of breast cancer, MD assessment methods need to be accurate and reproducible for widespread clinical use in stratifying patients based on their risk. In addition, a number of breast MRI biomarkers using contrast-enhanced and noncontrast-enhanced techniques are also being investigated as risk predictors. The validation and standardization of these breast MRI biomarkers will be necessary for population-based clinical implementation of patient risk stratification, as well. This review provides an update on MD assessment methods, breast MRI biomarkers, and their ability to predict breast cancer risk.

Background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: A comprehensive review

The degree of normal fibroglandular tissue that enhances on breast MRI, known as background parenchymal enhancement (BPE), was initially described as an incidental finding that could affect interpretation performance. While BPE is now established to be a physiologic phenomenon that is affected by both endogenous and exogenous hormone levels, evidence supporting the notion that BPE frequently masks breast cancers is limited. However, compelling data have emerged to suggest BPE is an independent marker of breast cancer risk and breast cancer treatment outcomes. Specifically, multiple studies have shown that elevated BPE levels, measured qualitatively or quantitatively, are associated with a greater risk of developing breast cancer. Evidence also suggests that BPE could be a predictor of neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment response and overall breast cancer treatment outcomes. These discoveries come at a time when breast cancer screening and treatment have moved toward an increased emphasis on targeted and individualized approaches, of which the identification of imaging features that can predict cancer diagnosis and treatment response is an increasingly recognized component. Historically, researchers have primarily studied quantitative tumor imaging features in pursuit of clinically useful biomarkers. However, the need to segment less well-defined areas of normal tissue for quantitative BPE measurements presents its own unique challenges. Furthermore, there is no consensus on the optimal timing on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for BPE quantitation. This article comprehensively reviews BPE with a particular focus on its potential to increase precision approaches to breast cancer risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment. It also describes areas of needed future research, such as the applicability of BPE to women at average risk, the biological underpinnings of BPE, and the standardization of BPE characterization. Level of Evidence: 3 Technical Efficacy Stage: 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:43-61.