Table 4:
Results of prior studies in comparison with own findings ordered by publication date
| Cancer Prevalence | Field strength | NC-MRI technique | Study population | Sensitivity TP/(TP+FN) | Specificity TN/(TN+FP) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baltzer et al. 2010 38 | 66.6% | 1.5T | ssEPI + T2w−TSE | Consecutive BI-RADS 4 and 5 masses | 94.4% | 85.2% |
| Yabuuchi et al. 2011 15 | 66.6% | 1.5T | ssEPI + T2w STIR and SPAIR | Mixed: asymptomatic breast cancers and control group | 50.0% | 95.2% |
| Wu et al. 2014 16 | 44.6% | 3T | ssEPI + T2w−TSE | Suspicious lesions ≤2cm | 86–93% | 81–94% |
| Trimboli et al. 2014 17 | 31.9% | 1.5T | EPI + T1w−GE + T2w−STIR |
Mixed: 46% preoperative staging | 78.4% | 87.3% |
| Telegrafo et al. 2015 18 | 62.6% | 1.5 T | DWIBS + STIR + T2w−TSE |
Mixed: BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions; patients with positive family history and dense breasts | 93.8% | 58.4% |
| Bickelhaupt et al. 2015 19 | 48.0% | 1.5 T | DWIBS MIP + T2w TSE and SPAIR | Screening detected BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions | 91.7% | 96.2% |
| Belli et al. 2016 20 | 44.6% | 1.5 T | ssEPI + STIR | Mixed: histologically proven cancers and equivocal findings cases | 78.8% | 96.9% |
| Shin et al. 2016 21 | 82.9% | 3T | rsDWI + T1w−VIBE | Biopsy-proven malignant masses | 91.6% | 86.4% |
| McDonald et al. 2016 22 | 25.3% | 1.5T, 3T | ssEPI, fs T2w−FSE + non-fs T1w−GRE | Case-control: 50% malignant masses, 50% healthy; all with dense breasts | 41.7% | 90.1% |
| This study | 59.3% | 3T | rsDWI | BI-RADS 4 and 5 lesions after conventional workup | 91.0% | 71.4–75.0% |
NC-MRI: Non-contrast MRI, TP: true positives, TN: true negatives, FP: false positives, FN: false negatives, ssEPI: single-shot Echo Planar Imaging, rsDWI: read-out segmented DWI, DWIBS: Diffusion Weighted Imaging with Body Signal Suppression, usually ssEPI with STIR fat saturation, TSE: Turbo Spin Echo, STIR: Short Tau Inversion Recovery, SPAIR: Spectrally Adiabatic Inversion Recovery, GE: gradient echo, fs: spectral fat saturation