Monitoring Response to Primary Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer using Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Martincich, Laura; Montemurro, Filippo; Rosa, G.; Marra, Vincenzo; Ponzone, Riccardo; Cirillo, Stefano; Gatti, Marco; Biglia, Nicoletta; Sarotto, Ivana; Sismondi, P; Regge, Daniele; Aglietta, Massimo

doi:10.1023/b:brea.0000010700.11092.f4

Cited by 222 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

141

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The MRI correlation with histopathological size (r ¼ 0.71) is similar to that found previously with correlations of r ¼ 0.75 (Rosen et al, 2003) and 0.72 (Martincich et al, 2004) reported. Other groups have reported correlations of r ¼ 0.6 (Partridge et al, 2002) and r ¼ 0.982 (Cheung et al, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Several studies have suggested that MRI is a more accurate method of delineating residual tumour following neoadjuvant chemotherapy than clinical, ultrasound or mammographic assessment (Boetes et al, 1995;Abraham et al, 1996;Drew et al, 1999Drew et al, , 2001Fischer et al, 1999;Balu-Maestro et al, 2002;Rieber et al, 2002;Cheung et al, 2003;Rosen et al, 2003;Martincich et al, 2004;Warren et al, 2004). Chemotherapy-induced fibrosis has been shown to impair the evaluation of tumour by conventional radiological methods and physical examination (Cocconi et al, 1984;Segel et al, 1988).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using MRI to plan breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to monitor the response of patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer with the aim of undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Patients were prospectively recruited to undergo MRI as well as conventional methods of clinical examination, mammography (MM) and ultrasonography (USS) and response was assessed by each of these methods. Thirty-two patients with primary breast cancer were recruited. Magnetic resonance imaging correlation with histopathological size (r ¼ 0.71) was superior to USS (r ¼ 0.65) and to MM where tumour size was not measurable following chemotherapy in 71% of patients. Magnetic resonance imaging had 87.5% sensitivity (95% CI ¼ 68 -97%) and 50% specificity (95% CI ¼ 16 -84%) for a PPV (positive predictive value) of 99.8% and NPV (negative predictive value) of 80% for the detection of residual invasive cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging displayed 80% sensitivity (95% CI ¼ 28.4 -99.5%) and 89% specificity (95% CI ¼ 71 -98%) to detect pathological pCR in the breast. Eighty-four per cent of recruited patients were identified as potentially suitable candidates for BCS following chemotherapy and of those choosing to accept BCS, breast conservation was achieved in 90.5%, or 65.6% of all patients. Of those who proceeded to BCS, 9.5% required a re-do mastectomy because of positive margins; however, no residual tumour was found on histological examination of mastectomy specimens. Magnetic resonance imaging appears to be superior to conventional methods for assessing pathological response and the low rate of re-operation for positive margins indicates a valuable role in aiding the decision to undergo BCS or mastectomy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using MRI to plan breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is in contrast to previous reports, which found correlation coefficients ranging from 0.70 to 0.98 for MRI (Esserman et al, 1999;Partridge et al, 2002;Rosen et al, 2003;Wasser et al, 2003;Martincich et al, 2004). However, a recent retrospective review of neoadjuvant chemotherapy trials from the MD Anderson Cancer Center also found a poor agreement between tumour size measurements by mammography or ultrasound and histopathology (Chagpar et al, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Assessment of residual tumour by FDG-PET: conventional imaging and clinical examination following primary chemotherapy of large and locally advanced breast cancer

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The aim of this was to evaluate FDG-PET (2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography) for assessment of residual tumour after primary chemotherapy of large and locally advanced breast cancer in comparison with conventional imaging modalities. METHODS: In a prospective multicentre trial, 99 patients underwent one or more breast imaging modalities before surgery in addition to clinical examination, namely, FDG-PET (n ¼ 89), mammography (n ¼ 47), ultrasound (n ¼ 46), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (n ¼ 46). The presence of residual tumour by conventional imaging, dichotomised as positive or negative, and the level of FDG uptake (standardised uptake values, SUV) were compared with histopathology, which served as the reference standard. Patients with no residual tumour or only small microscopic foci of residual tumour were classified as having minimal residual disease and those with extensive microscopic and macroscopic residual tumour tissue were classified as having gross residual disease. RESULTS: By applying a threshold SUV of 2.0, the sensitivity of FDG-PET for residual tumour was 32.9% (specificity, 87.5%) and increased to 57.5% (specificity, 62.5%) at a threshold SUV of 1.5. Conventional imaging modalities were more sensitive in identifying residual tumour, but had a low corresponding specificity; sensitivity and specificity were as follows: MRI 97.6 and 40.0%, mammography 92.5 and 57.1%, ultrasound 92.0 and 37.5%, respectively. Breast MRI provided the highest accuracy (91.3%), whereas FDG-PET had the lowest accuracy (42.7%). CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET does not provide an accurate assessment of residual tumour after primary chemotherapy of breast cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging offers the highest sensitivity, but all imaging modalities have distinct limitations in the assessment of residual tumour tissue when compared with histopathology.

show abstract

“…The relative change in MRI measured longest tumor diameter had a high sensitivity and specificity for predicting pathologic response, with only one false positive and one false negative result. MRI has been shown to provide an accurate estimation of tumor size in invasive breast cancer compared with pathological tumor size (27,28) Several other studies of response to NAC in breast cancer patients found that early evaluation of MRI derived tumor diameter was the best predictor of response to NAC, (7,13,(29)(30)(31), although the same relationship was not found in (32).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diffusion‐weighted and dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI in evaluation of early treatment effects during neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

Jensen¹,

Garzón²,

Heldahl³

et al. 2011

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To use dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) and diffusion-weighted (DW) MRI at 3 Tesla (T) for early evaluation of treatment effects in breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and assess the reliability of DW-MRI.Materials and Methods: DW-and DCE-MRI acquisitions of 15 breast cancer patients were performed before and after one cycle of NAC. MRI tumor diameter and volume, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and kinetic parameters (K trans , v e ) were derived. The reliability of ADC before NAC was assessed. Changes in MRI parameters after NAC were analyzed, and logistic regression analysis was used to find the best predictors for pathologic response. Results:The reliability for ADC values was high, with intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.84 (P ¼ 0.001). After one cycle of NAC, MRI tumor diameter (8%, P ¼ 0.005) and tumor volume (30%, P ¼ 0.008) was reduced for all patients, while ADC mean values increased (0.12 mm 2 /s, P ¼ 0.008). The best predictor for treatment response was a change in MRI tumor diameter with mean error rate of 0.167 (13% for responders, 5% for nonresponders, P ¼ 0.291).Conclusion: Changes in MRI derived tumor diameter and ADC after only one cycle of NAC could provide a valuable tool for early evaluation of treatment effects in breast cancer patients.

show abstract

Monitoring Response to Primary Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer using Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Cited by 222 publications

References 25 publications

Using MRI to plan breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer

Using MRI to plan breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer

Assessment of residual tumour by FDG-PET: conventional imaging and clinical examination following primary chemotherapy of large and locally advanced breast cancer

Diffusion‐weighted and dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI in evaluation of early treatment effects during neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About