Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29190227›Full record

ArticleInvestigative radiology2018

Potential of Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Characterization of Breast Lesions: Intraindividual Comparison With Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Pascal A T Baltzer, Hubert Bickel, Claudio Spick, Georg Wengert, Ramona Woitek, Panagiotis Kapetas, Paola Clauser, Thomas H Helbich, Katja Pinker

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Breast Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging: Current Applications, Insights from Screening, and Future Directions.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Update on DWI for Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Monitoring.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Special Issue "Advances in Breast MRI".Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Pascal A T Baltzer
Hubert Bickel
Claudio Spick
Georg Wengert
Ramona Woitek
Panagiotis Kapetas
Paola Clauser
Thomas H Helbich
Katja Pinker

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the potential of noncontrast magnetic resonance imaging (NC-MRI) with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in characterization of breast lesions in comparison to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) at 3 T. MATERIALS AND

methodsConsecutive patients with conventional imaging (mammography, ultrasound) BI-RADS 4/5 findings were included in this institutional review board-approved single-center study. All underwent 3 T breast MRI including readout-segmented DWI, DCE, and T2-weighted sequences. Final diagnosis was defined by histopathology or follow-up (>24 months). Two experienced radiologists (R1, R2) independently assigned lesion conspicuity (0 = minimal to 3 = excellent) and BI-RADS scores to NC-MRI (readout-segmented DWI including apparent diffusion coefficient maps) and DCE-MRI (DCE and T2-weighted). Receiver operating characteristics, κ statistics, and visual grading characteristics analysis were applied.

resultsSixty-seven malignant and 56 benign lesions were identified in 113 patients (mean age, 54 ± 14 years). Areas under the receiver operating characteristics curves were similar: DCE-MRI: 0.901 (R1), 0.905 (R2); NC-MRI: 0.882 (R1), 0.854 (R2); P > 0.05, respectively. The κ agreement was 0.968 (DCE-MRI) and 0.893 (NC-MRI). Visual grading characteristics analysis revealed superior lesion conspicuity by DCE-MRI (0.661, P < 0.001).

conclusionsDiagnostic performance and interreader agreement of both NC-MRI and DCE-MRI is high, indicating a potential use of NC-MRI as an alternative to DCE-MRI. However, inferior lesion conspicuity and lower interreader agreement of NC-MRI need to be considered.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaBreastBreast NeoplasmsDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingFemaleHumansImage EnhancementMagnetic Resonance ImagingMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID29190227
PMCPMC8158059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.