Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2017 Jul;27(7):2752-2764.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4650-6. Epub 2016 Nov 28.

Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation

Eva M Fallenberg et al. Eur Radiol. 2017 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) to digital mammography (MG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in a prospective two-centre, multi-reader study.

Methods: One hundred seventy-eight women (mean age 53 years) with invasive breast cancer and/or DCIS were included after ethics board approval. MG, CESM and CESM + MG were evaluated by three blinded radiologists based on amended ACR BI-RADS criteria. MRI was assessed by another group of three readers. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were compared. Size measurements for the 70 lesions detected by all readers in each modality were correlated with pathology.

Results: Reading results for 604 lesions were available (273 malignant, 4 high-risk, 327 benign). The area under the ROC curve was significantly larger for CESM alone (0.84) and CESM + MG (0.83) compared to MG (0.76) (largest advantage in dense breasts) while it was not significantly different from MRI (0.85). Pearson correlation coefficients for size comparison were 0.61 for MG, 0.69 for CESM, 0.70 for CESM + MG and 0.79 for MRI.

Conclusions: This study showed that CESM, alone and in combination with MG, is as accurate as MRI but is superior to MG for lesion detection. Patients with dense breasts benefitted most from CESM with the smallest additional dose compared to MG.

Key points: • CESM has comparable diagnostic performance (ROC-AUC) to MRI for breast cancer diagnostics. • CESM in combination with MG does not improve diagnostic performance. • CESM has lower sensitivity but higher specificity than MRI. • Sensitivity differences are more pronounced in dense and not significant in non-dense breasts. • CESM and MRI are significantly superior to MG, particularly in dense breasts.

Keywords: Breast cancer; Breast neoplasms; Contrast media; Magnetic resonance imaging; Mammography.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Eur J Radiol. 2014 Aug;83(8):1350-5 - PubMed
    1. Cancer. 2003 Feb 15;97(4):926-33 - PubMed
    1. Invest Radiol. 2010 Sep;45(9):520-8 - PubMed
    1. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008 Jan;107(1):1-14 - PubMed
    1. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008 Sep;111(1):179-87 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources