Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4056
ISSN (Online): 1875-6603

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

DCE-MRI Performance in Triple Negative Breast Cancers: Comparison with Non-Triple Negative Breast Cancers

Author(s): Hang Chen, Yu Min, Ke Xiang, Jialin Chen and Guobing Yin*

Volume 18, Issue 9, 2022

Published on: 01 April, 2022

Article ID: e250222201432 Pages: 7

DOI: 10.2174/1573405618666220225090944

Price: $65

Abstract

Background: Triple negative breast cancers are considered the worst prognosis in breast cancer. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging has been widely used in the diagnosis of breast cancer since it is more sensitive to breast cancer. However, few studies report the MRI characteristics of triple negative breast cancers.

Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the imaging finding in triple negative breast cancers compared with non-TNBC and attempt to predict it.

Methods: 223 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of breast cancer were enrolled in the study. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging was performed before being diagnosed with breast cancer, and histopathological assessment was confirmed after biopsy or operation. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on immunohistochemistry, namely the triple negative breast cancers or non-triple negative breast cancers.

Results: The 2 groups demonstrated significant differences regarding the tumor size, margin, outline, burr sign, enhancement, inverted nipple(P<0.05). A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to further validate the association of these features, however, only margin [odds ratio (OR), 0.038; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.014-0.100; <0.001], outline [odds ratio (OR), 0.039; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.008-0.200; <0.001], burr sign [odds ratio (OR), 2.786; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.225-6.333; 0.014], and enhancement [odds ratio (OR), 0.131; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.037-0.457; P=0.001] were associated with TNBC.

Conclusion: The results indicated that the specific dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging features can predict pathological results, with a consequent prognostic value.

Keywords: Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, triple negative breast cancer, comparison, molecular subtype, imaging feature, prediction.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 2010; 127(12): 2893-917.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.25516] [PMID: 21351269]
[2]
Britt KL, Cuzick J, Phillips KA. Key steps for effective breast cancer prevention. Nat Rev Cancer 2020; 20(8): 417-36.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41568-020-0266-x] [PMID: 32528185]
[3]
Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Moy L. Contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019; 50(2): 377-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26654] [PMID: 30659696]
[4]
Sung JS, Jochelson MS, Brennan S, et al. MR imaging features of triple-negative breast cancers. Breast J 2013; 19(6): 643-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12182] [PMID: 24015869]
[5]
Uematsu T. MR imaging of triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2011; 18(3): 161-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12282-010-0236-3] [PMID: 21181317]
[6]
Navarro Vilar L, Alandete Germán SP, Medina García R, Blanc García E, Camarasa Lillo N, Vilar Samper J. MR imaging findings in molecu-lar subtypes of breast cancer according to BIRADS system. Breast J 2017; 23(4): 421-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12756] [PMID: 28067435]
[7]
Moffa G, Galati F, Collalunga E, et al. Can MRI biomarkers predict triple-negative breast cancer? Diagnostics 2020; 10(12): 1090.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10121090]
[8]
Li T, Mello-Thoms C, Brennan PC. Descriptive epidemiology of breast cancer in China: Incidence, mortality, survival and prevalence. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016; 159(3): 395-406.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3947-0] [PMID: 27562585]
[9]
Bevers TB, Helvie M, Bonaccio E, et al. Breast cancer screening and diagnosis, version 3.2018, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncol-ogy. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2018; 16(11): 1362-89.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2018.0083] [PMID: 30442736]
[10]
Li J, Han X. Research and progress in magnetic resonance imaging of triple-negative breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging 2014; 32(4): 392-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2013.12.013] [PMID: 24512798]
[11]
Liu HL, Zong M, Wei H, et al. Added value of histogram analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient maps for differentiating triple-negative breast cancer from other subtypes of breast cancer on standard MRI. Cancer Manag Res 2019; 11: 8239-47.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S210583] [PMID: 31564982]
[12]
Youk JH, Son EJ, Chung J, Kim JA, Kim EK. Triple-negative invasive breast cancer on dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging: Comparison with other breast cancer subtypes. Eur Radiol 2012; 22(8): 1724-34.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2425-2] [PMID: 22527371]
[13]
Tečić Vuger A, Šeparović R, Vazdar L, et al. Characteristics and prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer patients: A croatian single institution retrospective cohort study Acta Clin Croat 2020; 59(1): 97-108.
[PMID: 32724280]
[14]
Shi H, Wang XH, Gu JW, Guo GL. Development and validation of nomograms for predicting the prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer patients based on 379 Chinese patients. Cancer Manag Res 2019; 11: 10827-39.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S234926] [PMID: 31920392]
[15]
Friedman EP, Hall-Craggs MA, Mumtaz H, Schneidau A. Breast MR and the appearance of the normal and abnormal nipple. Clin Radiol 1997; 52(11): 854-61.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0009-9260(97)80081-5] [PMID: 9392464]
[16]
Geffroy D, Doutriaux-Dumoulins I. Clinical abnormalities of the nipple-areola complex: The role of imaging. Diagn Interv Imaging 2015; 96(10): 1033-44.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2015.07.001] [PMID: 26385836]
[17]
Yu ZG, Jia CX, Geng CZ, Tang JH, Zhang J, Liu LY. Risk factors related to female breast cancer in regions of Northeast China: A 1:3 matched case-control population-based study. Chin Med J (Engl) 2012; 125(5): 733-40.
[PMID: 22490565]
[18]
Pal SK, Childs BH, Pegram M. Triple negative breast cancer: unmet medical needs. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 125(3): 627-36.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-1293-1] [PMID: 21161370]
[19]
Boisserie-Lacroix M, Macgrogan G, Debled M, et al. Triple-negative breast cancers: Associations between imaging and pathological find-ings for triple-negative tumors compared with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative breast can-cers. Oncologist 2013; 18(7): 802-11.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0380] [PMID: 23821326]
[20]
Choi BB, Lee JS, Kim KH. Association between MRI features and standardized uptake value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in triple-negative breast cancer. Oncol Res Treat 2018; 41(11): 706-11.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000492341] [PMID: 30321870]
[21]
Gigli S, Amabile MI, David E, et al. Morphological and semiquantitative kinetic analysis on dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in triple nega-tive breast cancer patients. Acad Radiol 2019; 26(5): 620-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2018.06.014] [PMID: 30145205]
[22]
Podo F, Buydens LM, Degani H, et al. FEMME Consortium. Triple-negative breast cancer: Present challenges and new perspectives. Mol Oncol 2010; 4(3): 209-29.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molonc.2010.04.006] [PMID: 20537966]
[23]
Woodhams R, Kakita S, Hata H, et al. Identification of residual breast carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: Diffusion-weighted imaging--comparison with contrast-enhanced MR imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology 2010; 254(2): 357-66.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2542090405] [PMID: 20093508]
[24]
Jinguji M, Kajiya Y, Kamimura K, et al. Rim enhancement of breast cancers on contrast-enhanced MR imaging: Relationship with prognos-tic factors. Breast Cancer 2006; 13(1): 64-73.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2325/jbcs.13.64] [PMID: 16518064]
[25]
Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Patterns of peripheral enhancement in breast masses: Correlation of findings on contrast medi-um enhanced MRI with histologic features and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1997; 21(3): 421-30.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00004728-199705000-00016] [PMID: 9135652]

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
17
1
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy