Abstract:Objective To compare the value of diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) model with single-index DWI model parameters in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions,and to explore the correlation between the parameters and molecular subtypes and prognostic factors of breast cancer.Methods A retrospective analysis was performed with inclusion of 64 cases of breast diseases from January 2016 to May 2017 in Shanghai First People's Hospital.The patients were pathologically confirmed and typed, 30 cases are malignant tumors and 34 cases are benign lesions. DKI and DWI were performed within 2 weeks before the pathological examination. Invasive ductal carcinoma of grade Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ were revealed in 1, 7 and 13 cases respectively. Luminal A breast cancer was found in 10 cases, Luminal B breast cancer was diagnosed in 11 cases, HER-2 positive breast cancer was 4 cases and triple negative breast cancer was 5 cases. The expressions of estrogen receptor (ER), Progesterone receptor (PR), and HER-2 positive were found in 20, 14 and 15 cases respectively. Ki67 was highly expressed in 24 cases and low expression in 6 cases. All patients underwent both plain and enhanced mammography scanning. The kurtosis (MK), mean diffusivity (MD) and ADC value were measured. Prognosis analysis was performed according to the maximum diameter (>2 cm, ≤2 cm), vascular or neurological invasion (positive, negative), lymph node metastasis (positive, negative), ER (positive, negative), PR (positive, negative), HER-2 (positive, negative),Ki67 (positive, negative), pathological grade (grade Ⅰ+Ⅱ,Ⅲ). Two independent samples t test was used to compare DKI and DWI parameters between benign and malignant lesions. ROC analysis was performed for assessing the values of parameters in discriminating benign and malignant breast lesions. Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis H tests were used for the comparison of various prognostic factors or molecular subtypes.Spearman rank correlation analysis was used to explore the correlation of different prognostic factors and DKI and DWI parameters. Results The MK value of malignant group was higher than that of benign group,and the MD value and ADC value were lower than that of benign group (P<0.05). The area under the ROC for MK, MD and ADC were 0.897, 0.827 and 0.776, respectively. The area under the ROC was improved to 0.935 when three parameters were combined. The MK of ER positive group was higher than that of negative group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference of parameters among the other prognostic groups (all P>0.05). There was a low positive correlation between ER and MK (r= 0.417, P= 0.022). There was no correlation between the other prognostic factors and parameters (r=－0.086 to 0.313, all P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the MD, MK and ADC values among the four different subtypes of breast cancer (all P>0.05). Conclusions MK, MD and ADC values can be used to discriminate benign and malignant breast tumors, among which MK value has the best diagnostic performance. There is a certain correlation between DKI model parameters and prognostic factors.

Diffusion Parameters of Rectal Cancer Derived from Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging (DKI): Effect of Slice Protocols and Region of Interest on Measurement Consistency of Parameters

Diffusion kurtosis imaging in the characterisation of rectal cancer: utilizing the most repeatable region-of-interest strategy for diffusion parameters on a 3T scanner

Variations of quantitative perfusion measurement on dynamic contrast enhanced CT for colorectal cancer: implication of standardized image protocol.

Comparison of reduced field‐of‐view diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) and conventional DWI techniques in the assessment of rectal carcinoma at 3.0T: Image quality and histological T staging

Differentiating between malignant and benign renal tumors: do IVIM and diffusion kurtosis imaging perform better than DWI?

Reduced Field-of-View Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Histological Characterization of Rectal Cancer: Impact of Different Region-of-Interest Positioning Protocols on Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Measurements.

Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging in Assessment of Gastric Cancer Aggressiveness

The value of diffusion kurtosis imaging in assessing pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in rectal cancer: a comparison with conventional diffusion-weighted imaging.

Characterization of rectal cancer: Whole-tumour histogram analysis of diffusion kurtosis imaging at 3 T

Use of Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging and Quantitative Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI for the Differentiation of Breast Tumors

Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and pathological prognostic factors in rectal cancer

Comparative Study of Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging Model and Diffusion Weighted Imaging Model in Diagnosisofbreastcancer

MR diffusion kurtosis imaging versus standard diffusion imaging: changes with radiation in uterine cervical carcinoma xenografts

Diffusion kurtosis imaging and MRI-detected extramural venous invasion in rectal cancer: correlation with clinicopathological prognostic factors

A multicenter study of cervical cancer using quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging

Restriction Spectrum Imaging and Diffusion Kurtosis Imaging for Assessing Proliferation Status in Rectal Carcinoma

Quantitative Assessment of Breast Tumor: Comparison of Four Methods of Positioning Region of Interest for Synthetic Relaxometry and Diffusion Measurement

Three-dimension amide proton transfer MRI of rectal adenocarcinoma: correlation with pathologic prognostic factors and comparison with diffusion kurtosis imaging

Diffusion Kurtosis MR Imaging versus Conventional Diffusion-Weighted Imaging for Distinguishing Hepatocellular Carcinoma from Benign Hepatic Nodules

Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast lesions: Region-of-interest placement and different ADC parameters influence apparent diffusion coefficient values

Effect of region of interest on ADC and interobserver variability in thyroid nodules