Assignment of the biological value of solid breast masses based on quantitative evaluations of spectral CT examinations using electron density mapping, Zeffective mapping and iodine mapping

Objective: We aimed to asses, in a clinical setting, whether the newly available quantitative evaluation of electron density (ED) in spectral CT examinations of the breast provide information on the biological identity of solid breast masses and whether ED maps yield added value to the diagnostic information of iodine maps and Zeff maps calculated from the same CT image datasets. Methods: All patients at the University Breast Cancer Center who underwent a clinically indicated Dual Layer Computed Tomography (DLCT) examination for staging of invasive breast cancer from 2018 to 2020 were prospectively included. Iodine concentration maps, Zeff maps and ED maps were automatically reconstructed from the DLCT datasets. Region of interest (ROI) based evaluations in the breast target lesions and in the aorta were performed semi-automatically in identical anatomical positions using dedicated evaluation software. Case-by-case evaluations were carried independently by 2 of 4 radiologists for each examination, respectively. Statistical analysis derived from the ROIs was done by calculating ROC/AUC curves and Youden indices. Results: The evaluations comprised 166 DLCT examinations. In the ED maps the measurements in the breast target lesions yielded Youden cutpoints of 104.0% (reader 1) and 103.8% (reader 2) resulting in AUCs of 0.63 and 0.67 at the empirical cutpoints. The variables "Zeff" and "iodine content" derived from the target lesions showed superior diagnostical results, with a Youden cutpoint of 8.0 mg/ml in the iodine maps and cutpoints of 1.1/1.2 in the Zeff maps the AUCs ranging from 0.84 to 0.85 (p = 0.023 to <0.000). The computational combination of Zeff and ED measurements in the target lesions yielded a slight AUC increase (readers 1: 0.85-0.87; readers 2: 0.84-0.94). The ratios of the measured values in the target lesions normalized to the values measured in the aorta showed comparable results. The AUCs of ED derived from the cutpoints showed inferior results to those derived from the Zeff maps and iodine maps (ED: 0.64 and 0.66 for reader 1 and 2; Zeff: 0.86 for both readers; iodine content: 0.89 and 0.86 for reader 1 and 2, respectively). The computational combination of the ED results and the Zeff measurements did not lead to a clinically relevant diagnostic gain with AUCs ranging from 0.86 to 0.88. Conclusions: Quantitative assessments of Zeff, iodine content and ED all targeting the physical and chemical aspects of iodine uptake in solid breast masses confirmed diagnostically robust cutpoints for the differentiation of benign and malignant findings (Zeff < 7.7, iodine content of <0.8 mg/ml). The evaluations of the ED did not indicate any added diagnostic value beyond the quantitative assessments of Zeff and iodine content. Further research is warranted to develop suitable clinical indications for the use of ED maps.